sussexpob wrote:My question.....
Is it sensible/correct to leave out the previous player of the tournament in 2009, and arguably England's best ever ODI/T20 batter, when you have no one near his quality to replace him? The answer is obviously no. The small print is something I dont give two hoots about. If he wants to play and he makes the team much better, you play him.
The ECB should not have the right to question a players availability, and imo, the selectors job is to pick the best available team for any given match.... if a player makes himself unavailable then you dont pick him, if he is on form(and KP is) and he is clearly good enough to walk into the team, you pick him if available.
I would say that england will miss KP, BUT, no one player is bigger than the team, when that starts to happen you end up with what happened in 2006-2008. Where factions start to form and people lookout for number one, which generally ends up in the whole team underperforming.
This is the point that is being missed, the england cricket team will continue to play cricket with or without KP, they may actually improve without him, the may also underperform without him, but we wont know unless we try, and so far England have done well without him, though that was against a low ranked WI's team and an under-prepared and inexperienced australian team.
We also forget that this isnt the first time this has happened, Boycott tried it in the 70's when he got miffed at not being made captain.
Its this "Team England" superiority complex that I really dont like about Flower's England team. I mean yes, I completely agree with central contracts and the new non-knee jerk loyalty that has allowed players out of form to stay in the team and become better players for it.... the England team is a solid unit.... but there needs to be compromise.
I'm sorry but every great team has to have a superiority complex its what give them presence on the field, look bakc at the australian side of the 90's and 2000's they oozed superiority, not because they necessarily had it but because the backed themselves and the performances flowed. THe same can be said of the West indies of the 75-90's, of Huttons england, Bradmans Invicibles and other teams of the past.
I mean Flower is the coach of the team, not a policy setter for the ECB, and certainly not the voice of the paying fans and public who pay their money to see KP over many others in the team.
No his official title is Director of Cricket, which means hes more than a coach and sits on the selection panel, it also gives him input into the terms he wants in the Central contract.
I challenge any England fan, or any cricket lover, to tell me the sport of limited overs cricket is better without KP!!
I definately wont say that the game is better without KP, but that doesnt mean its any worse, all players reach a point where they hang up thier gloves for the last time, butt he game goes on.
As for the IPL thing, I also challenge anyone on this board to tell me they wouldnt want to have their cake and eat it. A player wanting his profession to pay the best wage at the expense of playing for country? I would, no doubt, think about limiting my test career to earn a million dollars easy money over a month... I doubt many of the moral crew here would too!
In that case why doesnt he leave the whole thing behind if he can live off his IPL & T20 salaries then so be it, thats his choice, but as I've said with Gayle, what confidence does it give fresh players that england draft in to cover for KP only to be told to sod off when he deems he wants to play an international, that leads to an unsettled team and apathy, among the players.
Personally If I was offered the opportunity to earn 3 times my salary as a contractor during my holidays I wouldnt do it, for two reasons, (1) I think its morally wrong to do so, (2) I'd probably get sacked for breach of contract, especially if it was for a rival.
