Kevin Pietersen's Autobiography.

[Arthur Crabtree]

KP deserves some censure if he criticised Strauss to the SA team. Though there were circumstances. Pietersen felt alienated from his side, particularly over the fake twitter account. He went to Strauss and Flower about it, and they did nothing (by the way, I think KP overreacted about this, though it doesn't reflect well on the possible participants in the side). He says he had no friends in the side, and was spending time with IPL team mates in the SA side. I'm sure many criticise team mates (I've read someone ask if Botham ever criticised Boycott to his mate Viv). KP can't have expected them to go to the press! All of our lives are only made functional by the trust we have in our friends. They all have potential to wake things awkward for us by the confidences we make.

The ECb massively overreacted. And so did the press. Which played into the hands of the SA team. They did what SA wanted. And yet, KP did what they asked. He had to contact each member of the squad, no matter how little he knew them, and apologise! He had weekly sessions with FLower to monitor his behaviour around the team. It was a very pointed humiliation. But KP endured it. Some say they were trying to force him out without having to sack him.

[Arthur Crabtree]

this is the thing that is annoying me atm , I don't see how many people could be happy with the way the ECB has handled the last couple of years , and I am not defending KP here , he has contributed in a big way to the problems, but their man management, PR and general head in the sands attitude has been stunningly inept

and here we are arguing about what KP might have called strauss in a text message

Well, many have been critical of the ECB over this period. The press however have allowed them to carry on without any scrutiny. They've been happy to blame Pietersen at the behest of the ECB.

To answer Adi's point, I think the present team of Flower, Moores and Cook could be gone by the end of next year if England continue to fail. If they do well in the WC, the Ashes and tours to UAE and SA, then we can probably say that they deserve the right to carry on and have successfully dealt with a crisis. Though fixture congestion will not have gone away, and potentially a new generation of players will be damaged by burn out.

[Aidan11]

Can't find anything in the papers regarding the book today.

Has it already become chip wrapping?

[Aidan11]

Forgot about this one

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/cricke ... crite.html

[braveneutral]

This was on HIGNFY tonight.

Not the thread, but the book.

It was their third item which I suppose highlights it's importance given the relatively minor popularity of cricket in the country (in comparison to other sports).

I voted UKIP.

Oh, wrong divisive comment,

Won't be 800 posts by midnight.



I suppose I could have spread these out.

I had a feeling HIGNFY would give it a mention.


Next - off to 8 out of 10 Cats.

Maybe Cats isn't the word Strauss would use.

Yes Straussy would use another word.

Is it Cats material? Does football obsessed Joe Bloggs know who KP is?

[hopeforthebest]

Pietersen was a fading star who couldn't accept it. His record after his so called reintergration is pretty poor:

!6 tests,30 innings, 2 centuries, 8 half centuries and a 36.83 average.


Before AC comes in claiming others were doing just as badly lets have a look:

Bell in the same period: 3 centuries and 8 half centurie average 39.73
Cook: 5 centuries and 9 half centuries average 40.80
Trott: 2 centuries and 6 half centuries average 38.82

[Arthur Crabtree]

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... pe=batting

Not that much in it really. I don't think the three run difference between Bell and KP explains their different treatment. Cook had a great tour of India in this period, it's been a lot different since then. You can slice it differently, and get a slightly different picture, but still they are all massively under achieving.

For example, from the beginning of that year (2012).


http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine ... pe=batting

[hopeforthebest]

I chose the point when KP was allowed back into the squad because it's relevant to what subsequently happened. Also I had no idea how the stats would appear, they were not selected to support my contention that KP was in decline. I'm sure if you choose other dates you'll eventually find a period that suits your case.

[SaintPowelly]

this is the thing that is annoying me atm , I don't see how many people could be happy with the way the ECB has handled the last couple of years , and I am not defending KP here , he has contributed in a big way to the problems, but their man management, PR and general head in the sands attitude has been stunningly inept

and here we are arguing about what KP might have called strauss in a text message

I don't think many people are saying the ECB are innocent, my problem is KP acting like a victim, when he isn't.

[Arthur Crabtree]

I chose the point when KP was allowed back into the squad because it's relevant to what subsequently happened. Also I had no idea how the stats would appear, they were not selected to support my contention that KP was in decline. I'm sure if you choose other dates you'll eventually find a period that suits your case.

Which really backs up what I'm saying. That we get a slightly different picture from where we start, but whichever we choose, they are all doing much worse.

[alfie]

And it's not KP against everyone else. So far Tremlett has backed him. Clearly no one out of the present team will back him, but KP does say that he has had messages of support.

We've been over and over why he didn't play for Surrey last season.

In terms of pissing into the wind, I reckon at least half the posters on this thread are antagonistic to KP.

Probably sympathetic.
Myself
Sussex
Splinters
Adi
Aidan
Rich

Probably antagonistic
Powelly
Hope
Budget
KJ
DrRobert
#Brown
Albondiga
Al

Difficult to tell
braveneutral
Yuppie
Slipstream
Dan
Durham
Matt
bhaveshgor

I don't regard myself as antagonistic at all, simply trying to counter those like yourself that are accepting almost blindly Pietersen's version of events.
Certainly in Pietersen's case the ECB have totally mishandled the whole affair and deserves all the criticism they are receiving but I suspect the Flower regime would not have achieved the success it did if Pietersen's criticisms are true. I can well believe that KP's reintergration didn't work out but after the rancour of 2012 and the accompanying cricketing failures that's hardly surprising.

Well I haven't made the list at all ; probably because I've been reading but not commenting lately ...but I suspect Arthur would put me on the antagonistic list.
Actually wasn't anti KP from the off ; was sorry to see him go , and wondered quite why he had to be so totally put off limits .
But : the more KP talks and writes , the more I am persuaded that the selectors did exactly what they had to do. When a team is winning , a maverick with talent can be accomadated - even welcomed . His essential self centred nature is actually an asset (Boycott. Even Hadlee, to a point. And there have been others ) but when a team hits the skids , and a new start is required , you just cannot indulge players whose primary concern is their own personal satisfaction - and who are simply not prepared to put the team first and do what the coach/captain ask for...
Coaches and Captains can be wrong : but if so they can be replaced. While they are there , it is the job of the players to back do their best for them . And if they can't or won't then it is better they b...ger off.

It is clear from Pietersen's comments that he just couldn't work with Flower any more. Just as he couldn't work with Moores. Should the ECB have considered the next coach with one eye on whether he would be acceptable to KP ? Of course not.

Had he been churning out massive runs there might have been a case - a bit of a case - fot trying to keep him on board , tricky though it might have been. But the truth is ; the signs were we had probably seen the best of KP. Injuries - and perhaps loss of motivation ? - seemed to be hinting at bringing him back to "occasional match winner " instead of super star.
His form this year suggests England may not have lost as much as we first thought.

It isn't that I feel no sympathy for Pietersen : as Agnew said in that BBC piece , he is a lot more insecure and nervous an individual than he shows in public ; and he was , I'm sure , genuinely upset over the twitter thing . Just as some of his teammates have clearly upset him at times over other things : fair enough , we're all just human. But at the end of the day , Test Cricket is not about keeping everyone happy ( even players to whom we owe respect and gratitude for past endeavors ) It is about getting the best [bTeam][/b] on the field to win matches for the nation. So I think the ECB (for all the PR blunders and messing around , which has done them no favours) probably did the right thing in telling KP " thanks , but we have to move on from you" at the end of last year.

It is sad . But it is also over . And another 43 pages of this thread won't change that.

All entitled to your views. But that's mine. Thanks for reading.

[Arthur Crabtree]

I had a look through, but I didn't spot your posts Alfie. Sorry about that.

[hopeforthebest]

And it's not KP against everyone else. So far Tremlett has backed him. Clearly no one out of the present team will back him, but KP does say that he has had messages of support.

We've been over and over why he didn't play for Surrey last season.

In terms of pissing into the wind, I reckon at least half the posters on this thread are antagonistic to KP.

Probably sympathetic.
Myself
Sussex
Splinters
Adi
Aidan
Rich

Probably antagonistic
Powelly
Hope
Budget
KJ
DrRobert
#Brown
Albondiga
Al

Difficult to tell
braveneutral
Yuppie
Slipstream
Dan
Durham
Matt
bhaveshgor

I don't regard myself as antagonistic at all, simply trying to counter those like yourself that are accepting almost blindly Pietersen's version of events.
Certainly in Pietersen's case the ECB have totally mishandled the whole affair and deserves all the criticism they are receiving but I suspect the Flower regime would not have achieved the success it did if Pietersen's criticisms are true. I can well believe that KP's reintergration didn't work out but after the rancour of 2012 and the accompanying cricketing failures that's hardly surprising.

Well I haven't made the list at all ; probably because I've been reading but not commenting lately ...but I suspect Arthur would put me on the antagonistic list.
Actually wasn't anti KP from the off ; was sorry to see him go , and wondered quite why he had to be so totally put off limits .
But : the more KP talks and writes , the more I am persuaded that the selectors did exactly what they had to do. When a team is winning , a maverick with talent can be accomadated - even welcomed . His essential self centred nature is actually an asset (Boycott. Even Hadlee, to a point. And there have been others ) but when a team hits the skids , and a new start is required , you just cannot indulge players whose primary concern is their own personal satisfaction - and who are simply not prepared to put the team first and do what the coach/captain ask for...
Coaches and Captains can be wrong : but if so they can be replaced. While they are there , it is the job of the players to back do their best for them . And if they can't or won't then it is better they b...ger off.

It is clear from Pietersen's comments that he just couldn't work with Flower any more. Just as he couldn't work with Moores. Should the ECB have considered the next coach with one eye on whether he would be acceptable to KP ? Of course not.

Had he been churning out massive runs there might have been a case - a bit of a case - fot trying to keep him on board , tricky though it might have been. But the truth is ; the signs were we had probably seen the best of KP. Injuries - and perhaps loss of motivation ? - seemed to be hinting at bringing him back to "occasional match winner " instead of super star.
His form this year suggests England may not have lost as much as we first thought.

It isn't that I feel no sympathy for Pietersen : as Agnew said in that BBC piece , he is a lot more insecure and nervous an individual than he shows in public ; and he was , I'm sure , genuinely upset over the twitter thing . Just as some of his teammates have clearly upset him at times over other things : fair enough , we're all just human. But at the end of the day , Test Cricket is not about keeping everyone happy ( even players to whom we owe respect and gratitude for past endeavors ) It is about getting the best [bTeam][/b] on the field to win matches for the nation. So I think the ECB (for all the PR blunders and messing around , which has done them no favours) probably did the right thing in telling KP " thanks , but we have to move on from you" at the end of last year.

It is sad . But it is also over . And another 43 pages of this thread won't change that.

All entitled to your views. But that's mine. Thanks for reading.

That says pretty much how I feel except the manner of KP's departure was handled atrociously. Pietersen deserved better than that.

[alfie]

Yes I agree it was poorly handled. Probably more incompetence than malice ? Though it is difficult to see a graceful way to arrange the exit.

Perhaps they could have just left him out ( after a discreet word to the man himself , so he knew where he stood ) and then put out a general sort of statement about rebuilding , etc , etc. But do you really think Pietersen - or his fans - would have gone quietly ? Whatever they did , it was going to end in tears.

I'd have much preferred a different and more dignified end for the man - who gave me many hours of cricket watching delight. But somehow the very nature of the man carried the seeds of his own destruction ...ancient Greek tragedies come to mind...

[Aidan11]

I've been out the last few hours. Any further developments?