The enigma that is Kevin Pietersen

[Making_Splinters]

Whether the ECB allowing Struass to stop playing T20 was a good move or not is really rather irrelevant here, the ECB have set their stand out with regards to KP playing T20 by saying that a player can not play only one limited overs format a position that they themselves have already ignored for another player.

You can't hold something up as a hard and fast rule and justify your decisions based on its immutability when you have broken it in the past.

Important to remember this rule was only put into contracts in September 2011 so didnt apply when Strauss "retired" from T20s. Times change.

If that is the case it would certainly be interesting to see their justification for adding it.

[hopeforthebest]

How does one get to know the details of central contracts?

[andy]

earn one

[Making_Splinters]

It's in the ECB annual report which can be found online.

I'm looking forward to the next one coming out because it will show how much the Morgan Report cost.

[Kim]

Whether the ECB allowing Struass to stop playing T20 was a good move or not is really rather irrelevant here, the ECB have set their stand out with regards to KP playing T20 by saying that a player can not play only one limited overs format a position that they themselves have already ignored for another player.

You can't hold something up as a hard and fast rule and justify your decisions based on its immutability when you have broken it in the past.

Important to remember this rule was only put into contracts in September 2011 so didnt apply when Strauss "retired" from T20s. Times change.

If that is the case it would certainly be interesting to see their justification for adding it.

Justification? Specifically aimed at- - or because of KP IMO - either that or magnificently lucky timing by the ECB

Which is what bugs me about it all

[Making_Splinters]

Whether the ECB allowing Struass to stop playing T20 was a good move or not is really rather irrelevant here, the ECB have set their stand out with regards to KP playing T20 by saying that a player can not play only one limited overs format a position that they themselves have already ignored for another player.

You can't hold something up as a hard and fast rule and justify your decisions based on its immutability when you have broken it in the past.

Important to remember this rule was only put into contracts in September 2011 so didnt apply when Strauss "retired" from T20s. Times change.

If that is the case it would certainly be interesting to see their justification for adding it.

Justification? Specifically aimed at- - or because of KP I believe .

Which is what bugs me about it all

If they added a clause into the central contracts to try and force a player's hand then that is exceptionally poor practice from the ECB as far as I am concerned. Have you a link to where you got this from Kim?

[Kim]

The fact that the change was last Spetember was reported by Nick Hould in the Telegraph - who also mentioned how much this cost KP in another article. Ill have a search.

[D/L]

None of the recent posts supporting Pietersen's position, of course, addresses the issue of the ECB being seen to indulge a player who wishes to avoid the commitments he signed up to. Strauss's situation was entirely different. Although he was available (unlike Pietersen), the ECB, as his employer, simply did not select him for certain matches.

Simples.

[rich1uk]

so are you saying he doesn't have the right to retire at the time of his choosing ?

[D/L]

Not at all. As far as I’m aware, Pietersen has not retired from all the forms of cricket for which, according to the contract he signed, he is obliged to be available for selection.

[rich1uk]

since when has any player been forced to retire from all formats at the same time ?

or are you advocating that if he wants to continue to play test cricket he should be forced to play ODIs as well ?

[D/L]

Never, but that’s irrelevant and no, of course not.

The argument that trumps all others is that the ECB cannot indulge one player who wishes to pick and choose the games he plays and retain the authority they need to run the game.

[rich1uk]

why is it irrelevant ?

or is it irrelevant because you have realised your previous statements were wrong and have now tried to change the goalposts ?

he quite clearly said he wasn't enjoying playing ODIs and with the number of ODIs being arranged he didn't think he could continue to play at the required level in all three formats so wanted to stop playing ODIs , the ECB turned around and said that if he retired from ODis he wouldn't be available for t20s either, leaving him a test player only

i would much rather see an england team full of players who want to be there than seeing someone feeling they are being forced to continue to play that format and it potentially have a knock-on effect on his performances not just in ODIs but in tests as well

[Kim]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricke ... nty20.html

Its a saga

[rich1uk]

think some cricket forums would implode if he does an "afridi"