The enigma that is Kevin Pietersen

[Gingerfinch]

He clearly brought his historical feelings into a situation that had moved on. Strauss felt let down by KP calling him a doos to the SAns. But KP went through his truth and reconciliation and played after that. KP was later sacked and then the ECB offered him a way back. But Strauss acted under the influence of prior resentments.

Or for the good of the team?

[Arthur Crabtree]

Graves wasn't selecting KP, he was unsacking him. Saying he would be judged on merit. That makes it a matter of ECB policy.

But he wasn't in a position to do so as he hadn't officially taken up his post.

If Graves had no authority (he clearly did as he was already working in his new job) why did no one at the ECB point it out. The fact that everyone remained silent proved his authority.

[Arthur Crabtree]

He clearly brought his historical feelings into a situation that had moved on. Strauss felt let down by KP calling him a doos to the SAns. But KP went through his truth and reconciliation and played after that. KP was later sacked and then the ECB offered him a way back. But Strauss acted under the influence of prior resentments.

Or for the good of the team?

He was promised a clean slate and the opportunity to be judged on merit.

[Arthur Crabtree]

KP has been sacked twice for the same, extremely dubious, offence. I don't know how it can be defended.

[hopeforthebest]

Graves wasn't selecting KP, he was unsacking him. Saying he would be judged on merit. That makes it a matter of ECB policy.

But he wasn't in a position to do so as he hadn't officially taken up his post.

If Graves had no authority (he clearly did as he was already working in his new job) why did no one at the ECB point it out. The fact that everyone remained silent proved his authority.

You're grasping at straws AC. I'm pretty sure the authority of the ECB chairman doesn't extend to making those executive decisions, they rest with the CEO Tom Harrison. It's not a court of law where silence is often taken to be giving assent.

[hopeforthebest]

KP has been sacked twice for the same, extremely dubious, offence. I don't know how it can be defended.

Rubbish, it's simply that his appeal has been turned down by a higher court. Or his application for parole has been refused by the parole board.

[budgetmeansbudget]

KP has been sacked twice for the same, extremely dubious, offence. I don't know how it can be defended.

Unusual offence for sure, but then I don't think the dressing room has ever experienced a malevolent character of this type too often before.

[Aidan11]

KP should have offered Strauss a game of chance. Heads or tails - 50/50.

KP wins, he plays. If he loses his international career is over.

[Aidan11]

There may still be a chance KP plays again if Cook goes.

[dan08]

There may still be a chance KP plays again if Cook goes.

Nope, there's no chance.

[Gingerfinch]

He clearly brought his historical feelings into a situation that had moved on. Strauss felt let down by KP calling him a doos to the SAns. But KP went through his truth and reconciliation and played after that. KP was later sacked and then the ECB offered him a way back. But Strauss acted under the influence of prior resentments.

Or for the good of the team?

He was promised a clean slate and the opportunity to be judged on merit.

Not by Strauss though, was it? Strauss hasn't imo done much wrong apart from maybe bring personal issues into proceedings, but then again you can't hold that against him.

[Aidan11]

There may still be a chance KP plays again if Cook goes.

Nope, there's no chance.

The buzz seems to be that Cook has told Strauss that if KP played, he wouldn't. That seems to fit in with the contradiction over the stance Strauss and Graves took.

The likelyhood is though that Cook could be England captain for a while yet. However, KPgate has got rid of Downton and Moores so who knows...

[westoelad]

Graves wasn't selecting KP, he was unsacking him. Saying he would be judged on merit. That makes it a matter of ECB policy.

But he wasn't in a position to do so as he hadn't officially taken up his post.

Exactly-which is why the 1st thing he should do tomorrow when he officially takes charge is to admit that he spoke out of turn.

[Aidan11]

Is Graves due to speak to the press tomorrow?

Could be interesting.

[GarlicJam]

KP has been sacked twice for the same, extremely dubious, offence. I don't know how it can be defended.

Unusual offence for sure, but then I don't think the dressing room has ever experienced a malevolent character of this type too often before.

nor has the cricketing world seen a character quite so divisive as him before. The traffic in this thread in the past two days is testament to this.

Murali, yes, but it was not his character - which was pure charm - that caused all the palaver.