The enigma that is Kevin Pietersen

[meninblue]

You also risk losing the impact the older players have on the younger ones if they retire early.You often hear about how KP help younger players. Even helping Bell over the years. Though they might not miss being shouted at by Graeme Swann.

That's the point what me and my clubmate discussed couple of weeks back regarding somebody's views that Sachin must retire to make way for Ajinkya or other newbies. The mentor role is very crucial. I agree to that view.

[Kim]

The schedules actually look like they were designed to tire the players and drain their motivation. What is the message the ECB is getting about seven match ODI series? Are they listening? Maybe fine for Baistow and Buttler. Not for KP and Swann?

Its a difficult one but also cant ignore that its the players who want the games packed in so that they can have time off - and they want the money. England team costs the ECB 25 million so they have to generate money.

AS for mentoring can see that but worth noting KP goes his own way - he isnt coached by Gooch for example.

[shankycricket]

Its not as if KP hasnt been rested in the past. Last year, he was rested for the ODI series against India. In 2010, he was rested for the 3 ODIs against Bangladesh. He was also dropped against Pakistan but thats a different matter. The ECB were also going to rest him for the ODIs against West Indies. So he is getting enough rest IMO. I dont think he deserves more rest than this. Remember, he is not a fast bowler. Now is anyone suggesting to me that he should be rested for the Oz/SA ODI series too? So whats the point if he is going to miss 2 ODI series out of the 3 in the summer but play the IPL? Rest is important but I think a player should play more matches than he should rest for. By missing either the Oz/SA ODI series, he would have been rested for more ODIs than he would have played. Playing a domestic competition in another country and then asking to be rested for more than half of the One Day International matches? Now that just doesnt seem right.

[Making_Splinters]

He picked up an injury in the series against Australia which is why he was out against Bangladesh.

If the ECB was doing their jobs right then no centrally contracted player should have to ask for additional rest.

[shankycricket]

He picked up an injury in the series against Australia which is why he was out against Bangladesh.

If the ECB was doing their jobs right then no centrally contracted player should have to ask for additional rest.

I think they are. What exactly do you suggest in this scenario? He was going to be rested against the Windies anyway. I dont think a batsman needs more rest than that.

[Making_Splinters]

If he was going to be rested for the entire series he wouldn't have been named in the squad would he.

From what we have seen thus far the ECBs plan is that a first team player will play every match that isn't a dead rubber meaning that actually he wasn't confirmed as having any rest this summer at all.

[shankycricket]

If he needs a rest for more than half of the ODIs during the summer, then he really shouldnt be playing that format anyway and has done the right thing by retiring. Where the ECB have gone wrong IMO is by combining ODI and T20 retirements. If a player is not satisfied with the rest given to him then there is nothing much that the ECB can do. We dont want a situation where palyers dictate which players they play and which matches they dont.

[Making_Splinters]

Needs resting for over half? Fact of the matter is that unless results went our way he wasn't going to be rested for any of them.

It's pretty simple, the ECB aren't doing their job resting players if players feel they have to actually turn into Oliver Twist and ask for more.

[SaintPowelly]

If he needs a rest for more than half of the ODIs during the summer, then he really shouldnt be playing that format anyway and has done the right thing by retiring. Where the ECB have gone wrong IMO is by combining ODI and T20 retirements. If a player is not satisfied with the rest given to him then there is nothing much that the ECB can do. We dont want a situation where palyers dictate which players they play and which matches they dont.

The ECB did the right thing combining ODIs and T20s IMHO, otherwise you would find that Broad,Swann,KP and possibly a few others would play T20s only.

[Making_Splinters]

If he needs a rest for more than half of the ODIs during the summer, then he really shouldnt be playing that format anyway and has done the right thing by retiring. Where the ECB have gone wrong IMO is by combining ODI and T20 retirements. If a player is not satisfied with the rest given to him then there is nothing much that the ECB can do. We dont want a situation where palyers dictate which players they play and which matches they dont.

The ECB did the right thing combining ODIs and T20s IMHO, otherwise you would find that Broad,Swann,KP and possibly a few others would play T20s only.

And what exactly is the problem with that Saint?

[hopeforthebest]

If players were allowed to cherry pick which forms of cricket they would play, it would turn the whole idea of central contracts into a farce. Allowing Pietersen to do so would have created a president for others to follow.

[Making_Splinters]

If players were allowed to cherry pick which forms of cricket they would play, it would turn the whole idea of central contracts into a farce. Allowing Pietersen to do so would have created a president for others to follow.

Not really because a central contract is defined by what sort of cricket you play, Strauss doesn't play either T20 or ODIs yet is contracted, does that make it a farce?

[SaintPowelly]

If he needs a rest for more than half of the ODIs during the summer, then he really shouldnt be playing that format anyway and has done the right thing by retiring. Where the ECB have gone wrong IMO is by combining ODI and T20 retirements. If a player is not satisfied with the rest given to him then there is nothing much that the ECB can do. We dont want a situation where palyers dictate which players they play and which matches they dont.

The ECB did the right thing combining ODIs and T20s IMHO, otherwise you would find that Broad,Swann,KP and possibly a few others would play T20s only.

And what exactly is the problem with that Saint?

that our ODI side would be filled with players too crap for T20 cricket, people complain about Bell,Cook,Trott at the top..imagine if Morgan and Kieswetter didnt want to play.

[hopeforthebest]

If players were allowed to cherry pick which forms of cricket they would play, it would turn the whole idea of central contracts into a farce. Allowing Pietersen to do so would have created a president for others to follow.

Not really because a central contract is defined by what sort of cricket you play, Strauss doesn't play either T20 or ODIs yet is contracted, does that make it a farce?

Strauss retired from all one day cricket, he didn't ask to to play just T20. He is also approaching his last years in international cricket and did so in order to prolong his test career.

[Making_Splinters]

So what exactly is the difference between retiring from Tests as Colly did or all limited overs cricket as Strauss did and just retiring from one out of the three?

If players don't feel they can play all three formats internationally then there is either a problem with the timetable or the way the ECB are handling their players.