The enigma that is Kevin Pietersen

[Making_Splinters]

Additionally, I do find it hard to understand why Flower would make statements about being constantly available for England and not having players pick and chose, but didnt he rest a fully fit and raring to go Jimmy Anderson in a dead rubber test recently? Would seem like double standards a little!

I would have thought the difference between the players deciding when they play and the selectors / coaching staff deciding would have been fairly obvious.

[sussexpob]

Additionally, I do find it hard to understand why Flower would make statements about being constantly available for England and not having players pick and chose, but didnt he rest a fully fit and raring to go Jimmy Anderson in a dead rubber test recently? Would seem like double standards a little!

What message does it send out to a player potentially struggling with physical or mental exhaustion when you rest another player though? Is there a link between KP stepping out in public and saying I need to rest and play too much cricket, and the fact that JA had just been rested by the England team? Is that what he meant by "not being looked after??".. never know, but it seems a connection could be possible... maybe he asked to be rested and was told no and got pissed when he seen Anderson rested?

I mean the only argument I can think of is the integrity argument, and protecting a test for the paying public by not subsituting a B team for fans who bought tickets, but the ECB have already done that by forcibly resting a player, and in doing so saying to both the Windies and the public that "the third test is a nothing match to us"........ I mean, as an English Cricket fan I would spit chips if the paid £70 for a ticket and the best bowler in the country/arguably the world was sitting in the dressing room sipping tea because the people who I am giving my hard earned money to decided that the event I had paid to see wasnt important enough for him to grace my presence, despite being charged the usual premium to enjoy it( I would have been more annoyed while watching his replacement get hit around by WI number 11!!).

Therefore I dont really understand why a player should get a moral dressing down and his coach take the high ground when he turns round and says... "well boss, you know this utterly pointless 5 ODI's in BD straight after a period where I played a month of IPL, straight into a 5 months county stint, 7 tests and 14 limited international overs in an English summer, and then from October playing away from home till basically you get back for the same thing the summer after.... do you mind if I stay home and recharge?"

Flower acknowledged himself through the Anderson affair that some matches just mean nothing, so why should he then make a loyalty issue out of something when a player also acknowledges that his energies and resources could be better channeled if he could miss the same matches?

[hopeforthebest]

The the weather ar Edgbaston that test turned out to be restful for the whole team.

[Making_Splinters]

All of that isn't really anything to do with the point Sussex.

There is a fairly clear difference between a player saying, "I should be rested" and the selectors resting a player.

As I have said throughout this thread if the ECB were doing their job properly no player should need to ask for additional rest.

[Arthur Crabtree]

If a player like KP, who has stated often a long term wish to play all formats is having to 'retire' in order to rest, then the ECB haven't, as the player says, been looking after him.

[sussexpob]

There is a fairly clear difference between a player saying, "I should be rested" and the selectors resting a player.

Of course, but as I said, if you breed an environment on resting players and acknowledging that some tests are not as important as others, then how to you expect to maintain a level of professionalism to all the opponents you face?

Ok, there are ways to do it and times to do it, and KP got that wrongly before a major ODI tournament, but I dont really blame him for it. I think Andy Flower is a strong minded and skillful/knowledgeable coach, but his lack of flexibility on this issue and the decision to rest Anderson smacks a little in my mind of favouritism? I do have a feeling that KP's relationship with Flower will settle the outcome, and not the questions that arise on KP's impact on the team or his talents.

As AC says, I think KP's actions were that of a man making a point about the way he is treated and the amount of cricket he plays.... that is the problem that needs to be discussed, and for that I will always side with the player

[hopeforthebest]

All the players rested were bowlers not batsmen.

[Making_Splinters]

These are decisions that should not be in the hands of the players though if of course everything is running smoothy and the board is doing its job.

The whole idea behind central contracts was to remove issues such as these from the international equation by giving the coach / selectors complete control at the expense of player independance, sadly it seems as if the ECB are not quite on message here trying to place issues at the feet of the players which is a highly counter intuitive way of looking at the problem.

Two parties in a relationship one of whom can't do anything with out the other's say so and supposedly the fault lies with the submissive party - very strange.

[hopeforthebest]

Two parties in a relationship one of whom can't do anything with out the other's say so and supposedly the fault lies with the submissive party - very strange.

Pietersen could do something and he did it, he took the option every player has to retire. The ECB haven't hired a few big men to escort him onto the field in ODI games have they.

[Making_Splinters]

Two parties in a relationship one of whom can't do anything with out the other's say so and supposedly the fault lies with the submissive party - very strange.

Pietersen could do something and he did it, he took the option every player has to retire. The ECB haven't hired a few big men to escort him onto the field in ODI games have they.

Of course the players have a single thing they can choose to do: retire. All of the commotion that has brought the issue to this point falls squarely under the comment of mine you quoted.

[hopeforthebest]

No player in the history of English cricket has moaned and groaned as often and as much as KP. He has been falling out with clubs and individuals ever since he arrived. He thought, incorrectly that he could get the ECB to cave in to his demands and failed, bad luck.

[rich1uk]

No player in the history of English cricket has moaned and groaned as often and as much as KP. He has been falling out with clubs and individuals ever since he arrived. He thought, incorrectly that he could get the ECB to cave in to his demands and failed, bad luck.

[hopeforthebest]

that what's Pietersen will get more of during one day games.

[ddb]

If ever there's a thread of the year for going in circles...

[sussexpob]

These are decisions that should not be in the hands of the players though if of course everything is running smoothy and the board is doing its job.

The whole idea behind central contracts was to remove issues such as these from the international equation by giving the coach / selectors complete control at the expense of player independance, sadly it seems as if the ECB are not quite on message here trying to place issues at the feet of the players which is a highly counter intuitive way of looking at the problem.

Two parties in a relationship one of whom can't do anything with out the other's say so and supposedly the fault lies with the submissive party - very strange.

When Central contracts originally came in there was a lot less cricket being played, and a lot less of a team ethic. It seems that Central contracts, which I am very positive of generally, are now more of a ball and chain to players because the cricketing boards around the globe use the financial bait to lure players into very strict schedules and punishing amount of games.

Now its quite clear to see that the ECB and England Management's approach is to simply lay down the terms of the contract and force players into accepting those terms, or simply drop them and not use them... its accept all, or get nothing... thats the feeling the KP issue has given me. I dont think thats right at all, but then again, I have very socialist views on labour laws and workers rights, and am generally very scathing on employers bullying workers by dangling the financial carrot, especially when as with this instance, the ECB are KP's only option for a 12 month of the year income.