The enigma that is Kevin Pietersen

[shankycricket]

Just saying it isn't a problem, is sticking your head in the sand, if the players are saying it is.

As I've suggested earlier, older players have to be accommodated. For Stokes, Buttler and Bairstow, playing three formats maybe sounds ideal. Clearly for Strauss, Swann, Pietersen, it isn't. It's not just about the continual cricket. It's about contests that have no apparent importance. England's ODIs this summer are about getting the players in shape for a WC in three years time! That is the official reason for playing them! Their benefit to the young players mentioned is probably real. The more experienced players we risk falling off the end of the conveyor belt.

Not everyone should be treated the same. Not everyone has the same needs.

Agree totally. Though I am a bit disappointed that KP plays in the IPL.

[D/L]

Yes, it seems that Pietersen has sacrificed the least lucrative of his commitments in the pursuit of some rest from the game.

Peoples’ needs are indeed different. Perhaps, if Pietersen thought a central contract didn’t suit his, he shouldn’t have signed it.

[Arthur Crabtree]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/ju ... rs-england

Mother of mercy. Is this not the end of KP?

[shankycricket]

But whom would he replace?

[Arthur Crabtree]

I'd write down Trott. And then write KP. Then pick the rest.

[shankycricket]

Cant drop Bell at the moment, sorry. He will have to probably replace Trott.

[Aidan11]

He'd replace Bopara.

Simples.

[shankycricket]

I would not disturb the balance of this side just to accommodate KP. KP really should not be considered for the ODI side until he commits till the next WC. If he wants to unconditionally return to the side and play till the next WC, then he can be picked. If he returns based on the condition that he should be alowed to pick and choose his series, then that should not be allowed IMO.
T20 is a different matter, of course and I'd have him back in the T20 side at the earliest possible oppurtunity. But ODIs, I am not so sure. Its not as if he was in great ODI form until his last 2 ODIs.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Ravi is a batting all rounder. Morgan, Cook or Bell. I'd probably leave out Bell, and keep him as back up.

But it is hypothetical. A good solution would be for him to play T20.

[Making_Splinters]

The one thing I can 100% agree with KP on is this:

"OK, the ECB may say me playing in the IPL makes it hard to rest me but what annoys me is that, with every other board the IPL is a matter of fact. It's not going away.

[Aidan11]

The one thing I can 100% agree with KP on is this:

"OK, the ECB may say me playing in the IPL makes it hard to rest me but what annoys me is that, with every other board the IPL is a matter of fact. It's not going away.

I can see KPs point but at the end of the day resting from cricket is resting from cricket. Not resting from games where he'll get the least amount of money. Players were always complaining of burnout until the IPL came along.

[OffStumpYorker]

The one thing I can 100% agree with KP on is this:

"OK, the ECB may say me playing in the IPL makes it hard to rest me but what annoys me is that, with every other board the IPL is a matter of fact. It's not going away.

Very true, but the truth is KP had a chance to rest during the IPL and chose not to, he was als scheduled to miss the WI's ODI series anyway.

In the end it looks like its turned out ok, Bell has come back and is putting together decent scores at a reasonable rate, so the question is do England really miss KP to the extent he can hold them to ransom? The answer is almost an emphatic no.

[shankycricket]

Slotting KP straight back in for Bell, who has done well, just sends a horrifically wrong message IMO. Just would make KP believe that this team is desperate to have him. And that is simply not true. Lets be honest, in the last 3 and a half years, KP has contributed to only 2 of our ODI victories. Whats all the fuss about? We are winning matches quite regularly without him.


T20, as I said, is different and our chances of retaining the World T20 in SL later this year hinge a lot on KP's availability.

[Making_Splinters]

The one thing I can 100% agree with KP on is this:

"OK, the ECB may say me playing in the IPL makes it hard to rest me but what annoys me is that, with every other board the IPL is a matter of fact. It's not going away.

Very true, but the truth is KP had a chance to rest during the IPL and chose not to, he was als scheduled to miss the WI's ODI series anyway.

In the end it looks like its turned out ok, Bell has come back and is putting together decent scores at a reasonable rate, so the question is do England really miss KP to the extent he can hold them to ransom? The answer is almost an emphatic no.

At the end of the day the other big boards have gotten used to the IPL and just get on with it now, England are the only ones who seem to be still trying to drag it in to discussion rather than accepting it's there. The IPL isn't going away as KP says so England really do need to get used to the idea and get on with the game.

I wouldn't have KP back in the ODI side untill he has proven himself in both county and Test cricket and furthermore untill another player deserves dropping.

I do however hope as previously mentioned in this thread that the ECB do away with the requirement to play both or none when they review the central contracts come the close of the summer, that's not to get KP back in the T20 side but to remove a competely useless bit of red tape that will see our player retiring sooner than they would otherwise as Swann has already hinted that he is going to be doing.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Well, the best scenario for KP would be to make himself available for 50 over, and not be picked. And then he could be picked for T20.

Chances are, KP won't be picked for 50 overs now anyway.

Broad, Bresnan and Swann (and formerly KP, over a much longer period) are the only ones who play all three formats. Why not allow them to miss games if they feel the need of a break?