Pietersen at it again.

[sahel]

Nomads even before the Spen Cama money prepared players for high level League cricket. I was comfortably the worst player in the team and yet it improved me. I have been playing village cricket since 1989 so it certainly didn't put me off.

I once went on one of those "Red Letter Days" experience things which was a day with Mike Gatting at Lords. At the time I was a player in the Sunday Seconds. When we were discussing our 'codes' over a lunchtime pint and burger in the Tavern I mentioned that most in our team walked, all umpired with varying degrees of competence, that fielding mistakes were never deliberately mentioned or criticised and that the batting order revolved around everyone getting a game. He looked horrified.

I know there have been England (and Sussex) players who have had depression - a true mental illness - but I'm not sure why the bowler of a dropped chance giving you stick is worse than 30,000 drunk, baying Aussies or a packed Wanderers giving you exactly the same advice. Especially when you're being handsomely rewarded.

Just because it didn't harm you doesn't mean anything does it? . When I played I did not accept anyone shouting at me and as a parent I would object violently if my child aged 13 was shouted at. Shouting and swearing when mistakes are made is a sure way of ensuring a no risk approach; Is that what you want?

More fool Mike Gatting for being horrified. But then what do you expect from someone who toured South Africa when the whole decent world was boycotting it. I don't suppose he understood that either

 

[El Presidente]

The ECB knew KP’s book was coming for six months. It was there, lurking in the background like an agitated troll, throughout the entire summer. They must have known in would be explosive so why, given they had months to prepare, has their response been so clumsy?

Whether you love Kevin Pietersen or loathe him, I believe the ECB’s ineffectual response has thus far vindicated KP’s position.

The dossier wasn’t so much dodgy as dastardly. It read like a post-rationalised damp squib full of pedantry. What’s more, many of its claims are simply untrue: KP didn’t break protocol and corrupt a young player in Adelaide; he went clubbing with Stuart Broad. Once we know some of the accusations are untrue, how can we trust any of them?

Sometimes in sport one man becomes bigger than his employers. Had the Glazers sacked Sir Alex Ferguson when they bought Man Utd, there would have been revolution in the streets of Trafford (or should that be Cornwall?). The Glazers knew this. The big man was, for all intents and purposes, unsackable. Only a man like Fergie could’ve got rid of stars like Beckham, Keane and Van Nistelrooy so assuredly.

I’m not trying to draw exact parallels here. Kevin Pietersen is not David Beckham. Andy Flower is not Ferguson, and cricket certainly isn’t football. However, there are similarities.

Flower was unsackable at the time of the Ashes. He was (and remains) a significantly bigger fish than Downton. That’s Paul Downton, a man who had been ‘outside cricket’ for several years, and was basically on his first day on the job when he arrived in Sydney.

In these circumstances, Downton was never realistically going to sack Flower. He needed Flower to get him up to speed: having working in the City for yonks, Dowton was unfamiliar with the dressing room culture. He was just feeling his way. Downton was not the strong, informed, ECB managing director England needed at the time.

One wonders whether a different managing director, one who had remained close to the game and knew the players – someone who knew what modern dressing rooms were like - would have made the correct decision and sacked Flower, and perhaps removed Cook as captain too.

Instead, an out of touch Downton arrived in Sydney (after missing a large chunk of the MCG test) and desperately sought a briefing. Obviously the briefing came from the least suitable person: the coach with a vested interest whose team were in decline and whose methods were stale.

In January 2014, when the Ashes had been surrendered and the dressing room was in turmoil, the most powerful man in England cricket was Andy Flower. He had the ear of the primary decision maker who, in cricketing terms, was a pygmy by comparison: Downton’s cricketing CV was nothing compared to Flower - the man who defied Robert Mugabe and averaged fifty for lowly Zimbabwe.

It is unfortunate for English cricket that Flower told Downton, as many in his position would, that England’s problems were not his fault. After all, he’d already decided that his tactics – bowl dry and wait for the batsmen to make a mistake – were still best for the team, even though they hadn’t worked particularly well since the glorious win in India.

Flower was therefore in denial and, as a consequence, when he spoke to the wet behind the ears manager director about England’s woes, Downton naturally developed an erroneous understanding of England’s problems.

Downton didn’t question Flower’s judgement because Flower was the most senior employee at hand. He asked a few of Flower’s closest confidantes (Cook, Prior etc), but he failed to realise the obvious: of course, they were going to back their coach. The last captain who criticised their immediate boss, back in January 2009, was sacked.

And so it came to pass that Downton promoted the coach, retained the captain, and sacked the star batsman who, according to Michael Vaughan – someone who knew KP and was closer to the dressing room – should have been given more responsibility and made vice-captain.

At the current time, as the evidence emerges and the lies are gradually exposed, the decision to ostracise Pietersen and make him a scapegoat for the Ashes disaster looks wrong. It seems unfair and was not based on an accurate assessment of events.

 

[AmexRuislip]

Is this the front cover of KP's new book?

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Cricket outside of an Ashes series has never been as interesting as now. And that is a very interesting summary confirmed by other sources. Excellent post El Presidente.

 

[keaton]

Nomads even before the Spen Cama money prepared players for high level League cricket. I was comfortably the worst player in the team and yet it improved me. I have been playing village cricket since 1989 so it certainly didn't put me off.

I once went on one of those "Red Letter Days" experience things which was a day with Mike Gatting at Lords. At the time I was a player in the Sunday Seconds. When we were discussing our 'codes' over a lunchtime pint and burger in the Tavern I mentioned that most in our team walked, all umpired with varying degrees of competence, that fielding mistakes were never deliberately mentioned or criticised and that the batting order revolved around everyone getting a game. He looked horrified.

I know there have been England (and Sussex) players who have had depression - a true mental illness - but I'm not sure why the bowler of a dropped chance giving you stick is worse than 30,000 drunk, baying Aussies or a packed Wanderers giving you exactly the same advice. Especially when you're being handsomely rewarded.

That's Mike Gatting who captained an 'England' team to apartheid-era South Africa. Maybe he's opinions about what is and what isn't acceptable shouldn't be given too much attention

 

[Guinness Boy]

That's Mike Gatting who captained an 'England' team to apartheid-era South Africa. Maybe he's opinions about what is and what isn't acceptable shouldn't be given too much attention

....and the same player who took a bouncer full in the nose for his country unlike anyone on here.

 

[keaton]

....and the same player who took a bouncer full in the nose for his country unlike anyone on here.

Good point. I've completely changed my mind now, the fact he got hit in the face with ball means I know completely agree with abusing youngsters on debuts and eroding what confidence they have and we should all try and tour the ISIS state as soon as they can sort a cricket team

 

[Guinness Boy]

Good point. I've completely changed my mind now, the fact he got hit in the face with ball means I know completely agree with abusing youngsters on debuts and eroding what confidence they have and we should all try and tour the ISIS state as soon as they can sort a cricket team

Well it's about as relevant to the debate as leading a rebel tour.....

 

[keaton]

Well it's about as relevant to the debate as leading a rebel tour.....

Not really, times have changed and England were sh*t then.

 

[Seagull over Canaryland]

I enjoyed Matthew Syed's analysis in The Times earlier this week when he dissected KP (and Roy Keane) as 'ego fundamentalists' whose personal outlook is always their prime concern, that the world revolves around them, and everyone else is wrong, both men are in a constant state of 'righteous anger' with those around them. Now neither of them enjoy the oxygen of being centre stage on the playing field - so they so desperately need to tell the whole world about it - and (ahem) they have books to publicise....

I wonder how this will impact on the type of cricket played by England over coming months. The England team is showing some encouraging, if fragile signs of positive development. However I do fear the fallout from the KP circus will be a huge gift to England's opponents and to the media for years to come. Just imagine how the Aussie media and players will feed off this mess in the run up to the next Ashes, especially with KP fuelling matters from the side lines. They will look to prey on the slightest hint of disharmony, both on and off the pitch. You can foresee Anderson and Broad being inevitable focal points for attention, especially if they can be thrown off their games. Neither of them are shrinking violets and you would expect it to get into their heads and for them to bite back. What a mess.

It needs strong management from the hitherto lame ECB but Peter Moores and Alistair Cook will be exposed to the off field crap, yet neither of them seem best equipped to deal with non-cricket matters. Meanwhile we have some decent youngsters and I desperately hope they get a proper chance to let their cricket make the right headlines.

I agree it is really tragic that the incompetence of the ECB has put at risk much of the good work undertaken over the last 10 years getting England competitive in Ashes series and becoming the no.1 test side. Yes KP had a pivotal role in much of that - as did a handful of other big characters, but the team focus was lost. A maverick, but high maintenance cricketer who needed to feel he was the focus of everyone's thinking, however KP's divisive role in the England team was pretty obvious, his reconciliations were likely to be temporary and could come off the rails at any time. His personality seems way too big to be resolved over a couple of beers, when KP would demand nothing less than vindication of his own position. Yet the ECB still allowed this to fester. They singularly failed to impose strong management or firmly resolve this rather predictable malaise well before the fateful Ashes tour.

Now the ECB's ineffectual response to KP's book has compounded the mess. No way would KP ever 'go quietly' - so the ECB might have diffused the situation. Conversely - and bullying allegations apart - the ECB have even managed to gift KP some form of moral high ground.

Alex Ferguson is not among my favourites - but as Matthew Syed suggested the ECB's fallibility over KP has underlined what a testament it was for Fergie to keep Roy Keane 'onside' at Man U for so long - before eventually making a clean, if brutal break with him. Fergie had the final word at that time - which clearly does not sit well with Keane. An angry slow burning fuse was lit, that hasn't diminished, hence the resentful bile being now being spewed. History shows that Fergie made many difficult decisions mainly in the interests of the 'team. Maybe he recognised when an 'asset' was becoming a 'liability'.

 

[Mo Gosfield]

This is the million dollar question. The players who took us to number one in the world became "big time" in a way that they hadn't been on the way up... Prior, Swann, Anderson, Broad spring to mind along with KP who had always been that way inclined.

They became ' big time ' because they had had it relatively easy. They had piled up runs and wickets against some pretty ordinary Test opposition. Their characters hadn't been tested. The series Down Under saw them hit harder and with more intensity than they had previously experienced.
The Aussies regrouped after their dreadful summer and targetted our soft underbelly. They recognised Cook's weakness as a captain and knew that if they got on top, he would struggle to rally the troops. Under pressure, it would affect his batting as well. They knew Trott had a problem. It was obvious in England and the harder, faster wickets in Oz put paid to him very quickly. They knew Prior had a problem with quick bowling and can't play short pitched hostile stuff. Sure enough, he kept giving it away. They knew Swann was a ' good time ' charlie. Full of himself and his own self importance, he cracked when the pressure was on and removed himself from the line of fire. They knew Anderson would be ineffective on their wickets and they were right.
And finally KP. The one man capable of fighting fire with fire. But he was out of sorts and the pressure on his shoulders was too much, with so many failures around him.
In short, too many of them failed to show the necessary grit and fight expected of a highly rated international side. The cracks appeared and weaknesses exposed for all to see.

 

[Tooting Gull]

I enjoyed Matthew Syed's analysis in The Times earlier this week when he dissected KP (and Roy Keane) as 'ego fundamentalists' whose personal outlook is always their prime concern, that the world revolves around them, and everyone else is wrong, both men are in a constant state of 'righteous anger' with those around them. Now neither of them enjoy the oxygen of being centre stage on the playing field - so they so desperately need to tell the whole world about it - and (ahem) they have books to publicise....

I wonder how this will impact on the type of cricket played by England over coming months. The England team is showing some encouraging, if fragile signs of positive development. However I do fear the fallout from the KP circus will be a huge gift to England's opponents and to the media for years to come. Just imagine how the Aussie media and players will feed off this mess in the run up to the next Ashes, especially with KP fuelling matters from the side lines. They will look to prey on the slightest hint of disharmony, both on and off the pitch. You can foresee Anderson and Broad being inevitable focal points for attention, especially if they can be thrown off their games. Neither of them are shrinking violets and you would expect it to get into their heads and for them to bite back. What a mess.

It needs strong management from the hitherto lame ECB but Peter Moores and Alistair Cook will be exposed to the off field crap, yet neither of them seem best equipped to deal with non-cricket matters. Meanwhile we have some decent youngsters and I desperately hope they get a proper chance to let their cricket make the right headlines.

I agree it is really tragic that the incompetence of the ECB has put at risk much of the good work undertaken over the last 10 years getting England competitive in Ashes series and becoming the no.1 test side. Yes KP had a pivotal role in much of that - as did a handful of other big characters, but the team focus was lost. A maverick, but high maintenance cricketer who needed to feel he was the focus of everyone's thinking, however KP's divisive role in the England team was pretty obvious, his reconciliations were likely to be temporary and could come off the rails at any time. His personality seems way too big to be resolved over a couple of beers, when KP would demand nothing less than vindication of his own position. Yet the ECB still allowed this to fester. They singularly failed to impose strong management or firmly resolve this rather predictable malaise well before the fateful Ashes tour.

Now the ECB's ineffectual response to KP's book has compounded the mess. No way would KP ever 'go quietly' - so the ECB might have diffused the situation. Conversely - and bullying allegations apart - the ECB have even managed to gift KP some form of moral high ground.

Alex Ferguson is not among my favourites - but as Matthew Syed suggested the ECB's fallibility over KP has underlined what a testament it was for Fergie to keep Roy Keane 'onside' at Man U for so long - before eventually making a clean, if brutal break with him. Fergie had the final word at that time - which clearly does not sit well with Keane. An angry slow burning fuse was lit, that hasn't diminished, hence the resentful bile being now being spewed. History shows that Fergie made many difficult decisions mainly in the interests of the 'team. Maybe he recognised when an 'asset' was becoming a 'liability'.

Agree with most of that, and Syed's analysis. There are no winners with KP. Ego-maniac player falls out with equally unsympathetic team-mates, with an inept management standing by. I have slightly more time for Keane, and maybe he has more cause to have his say. After all he basically helped win Fergie a lot of those trophies, only to get a slagging for his pains.

And I do feel sorry for Andy Flower - nothing to do with who is right and who is wrong, but consider this. Pietersen is a drama queen, he is loving all this. The fallout, the attention, the TV and radio interviews, the constant spotlight, and shooting his mouth off left right and centre. Flower is/was very good at his job, and got England to No1 in the world, That is an incredible feat, people of my age never thought we would see it happen.

His focus was the team, always the team, not one individual though of course he had to try and harness the abilities of those individuals. But as a bloke he is clearly not the type to go shouting the odds and make himself the story. And our society seems to have developed in such a way that people like that just get drowned out, it is now about who makes the most noise rather than the truth or otherwise of what they are saying. Flower may be forced into a response because of the sheer bile being thrown his way, but you can be sure he won't enjoy it.

 

[Man of Harveys]

Agree with most of that, and Syed's analysis. There are no winners with KP. Ego-maniac player falls out with equally unsympathetic team-mates, with an inept management standing by.

Fair points but what exactly should the management have done differently in response to his "woe is me" bolox? Respond to Pietersen's frankly unhinged ravings in kind? After all the man has all the dignity and brains of Kim Kardashian, just with a mouth as big as her arrrse and equally full of sh1t. I don't blame them one jot for at least attempting to rise above his desperate, crass vulgarity.

Excellent post El Presidente.

Well. Like those replying emails people get from the club within seconds: well written and lengthy, certainly.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Just because it didn't harm you doesn't mean anything does it? .

Er yes, it means that getting a bit of stick for dropping a catch doesn't harm everyone

When I played I did not accept anyone shouting at me and as a parent I would object violently if my child aged 13 was shouted at. Shouting and swearing when mistakes are made is a sure way of ensuring a no risk approach; Is that what you want?

It wasn't the coach or parents let's be clear. It was my team mates. The coach would either have been umpiring or scoring, either of which does not allow you the opportunity to intervene. I accepted it because we won games. The feeling of winning games easily overtook a brief harsh word at a mis-field. That said, when it became clear I wasn't up to the grade I moved on to the less combative world of Sunday village cricket which is perhaps the ultimate no risk form of the game (unless you count having to put on an elderly "spinner" for a couple of overs to prevent him sulking). I liked the friendly, gentlemanly atmosphere of village cricket a lot and stuck to the ethos but I never got back the adrenaline buzz you get from winning an important game well.

You are largely missing the point though. The point is that team mates have always criticised team mates in the heat of the moment and it gets worse the higher up the tree you get in every sport and code. My son plays under 8s football. He is - well - not very good, so he is in a development squad. As parents we've all watched the video on how to behave on the touchline and encourage positively and we all do. The dev squad set up allows him to hone his skills and fitness with peers of the same ability and it is working wonders for his game and there is no criticism at all, just "unlucky" and "well tried". However the other reason for creating a dev squad was to allow the better players to flourish too and to minimise the instances of on field cricicism. This is under 8s remember.

If those players progress to top level they will have to grow thick skins because the criticism levelled at them won't just be from team mates, it'll be from the crowd and the media too. You and I may cosset an 18 year old on his debut but 1000 odd away fans won't, not will the twitter trolls, the sort of idiots who were spamming Stockdale the other week.

Now put that in to the context that the accused were the best players in the best team in the world - and KP wasn't complaining at the time.

More fool Mike Gatting for being horrified. But then what do you expect from someone who toured South Africa when the whole decent world was boycotting it. I don't suppose he understood that either

As replied to keaton that's completely irrelevant.

 

[spring hall convert]

If you are prepared to dimiss KP's version of events as fantasy out of hand and don't think the ECB has any self-analysis to do here, then prepare yourself for a lengthy spell of utter mediocrity because that is where Downton, Cook and Moores are going to get us. With the money that Sky have thrown at cricket in this country that isn't good enough.We had the chance to be a top tier cricketing nation for a long period of time and we chucked it away.

KP is clearly no saint but the ECB/ Flower has a case to answer here. Anyone suggesting otherwise is allowing their distaste for a clearly divisive character cloud the issue.

 

[keaton]

As replied to keaton that's completely irrelevant.

People's personal feeling about KP should be irrelevant to what he (and others back) says happened. But it's not.

 

[spring hall convert]

Er yes, it means that getting a bit of stick for dropping a catch doesn't harm everyone



It wasn't the coach or parents let's be clear. It was my team mates. The coach would either have been umpiring or scoring, either of which does not allow you the opportunity to intervene. I accepted it because we won games. The feeling of winning games easily overtook a brief harsh word at a mis-field. That said, when it became clear I wasn't up to the grade I moved on to the less combative world of Sunday village cricket which is perhaps the ultimate no risk form of the game (unless you count having to put on an elderly "spinner" for a couple of overs to prevent him sulking). I liked the friendly, gentlemanly atmosphere of village cricket a lot and stuck to the ethos but I never got back the adrenaline buzz you get from winning an important game well.

You are largely missing the point though. The point is that team mates have always criticised team mates in the heat of the moment and it gets worse the higher up the tree you get in every sport and code. My son plays under 8s football. He is - well - not very good, so he is in a development squad. As parents we've all watched the video on how to behave on the touchline and encourage positively and we all do. The dev squad set up allows him to hone his skills and fitness with peers of the same ability and it is working wonders for his game and there is no criticism at all, just "unlucky" and "well tried". However the other reason for creating a dev squad was to allow the better players to flourish too and to minimise the instances of on field cricicism. This is under 8s remember.

If those players progress to top level they will have to grow thick skins because the criticism levelled at them won't just be from team mates, it'll be from the crowd and the media too. You and I may cosset an 18 year old on his debut but 1000 odd away fans won't, not will the twitter trolls, the sort of idiots who were spamming Stockdale the other week.

Now put that in to the context that the accused were the best players in the best team in the world - and KP wasn't complaining at the time.



As replied to keaton that's completely irrelevant.

But your not even adressing the issue. We would all accept that in the heat of the moment things get said, as long as that is applied fairly and equitably across the team then I think people can take it. Whether it's helpful or not is a different issue.

What isn't acceptable is senior members of the dressing room targeting individuals for the purpose of self preservation. KP isn't complaining that he was a victim of the bullying himself, he was largely left alone as the cabal considered him to be important to England's fortunes. However, he alleges that senior players were making the dressing room a tough environment to break into becuase it suited their positions and their continued payment from the ECB.

If the later is correct, it is utterly unacceptable. KP has recieved support here.

 

[Guinness Boy]

But your not even adressing the issue. We would all accept that in the heat of the moment things get said, as long as that is applied fairly and equitably across the team then I think people can take it. Whether it's helpful or not is a different issue.

What isn't acceptable is senior members of the dressing room targeting individuals for the purpose of self preservation. KP isn't complaining that he was a victim of the bullying himself, he was largely left alone as the cabal considered him to be important to England's fortunes. However, he alleges that senior players were making the dressing room a tough environment to break into becuase it suited their positions and their continued payment from the ECB.

If the later is correct, it is utterly unacceptable. KP has recieved support here.

OK but this reply was really as part of a sub-thread due to a post I made specifically about on field reactions. That post doesn't talk about the "dressing room" and I replied because points and questions were put to me.

The relevant part of my post to the whole KP thing - which is why I mentioned him - is that he did not complain about "it" - the whole dressing room atmosphere - at the time. In fact he's waited till his book's due out....

 

[Tooting Gull]

But your not even adressing the issue. We would all accept that in the heat of the moment things get said, as long as that is applied fairly and equitably across the team then I think people can take it. Whether it's helpful or not is a different issue.

What isn't acceptable is senior members of the dressing room targeting individuals for the purpose of self preservation. KP isn't complaining that he was a victim of the bullying himself, he was largely left alone as the cabal considered him to be important to England's fortunes. However, he alleges that senior players were making the dressing room a tough environment to break into becuase it suited their positions and their continued payment from the ECB.

If the later is correct, it is utterly unacceptable. KP has recieved support here.

Come off it, are you really that gullible, one bit of hard-core spin from Pietersen and you're eating out of his hand!

He doesn't give a sh!t about anyone other than himself, and the reason he has brought the bullying up is a) to sell the book and b) because he didn't like the Twitter parody account.

To now claim what he was REALLY bothered about was those youngsters trying to break in is utter revisionist drivel dreamed up years after the event to support his position.

 

[keaton]

Come off it, are you really that gullible, one bit of hard-core spin from Pietersen and you're eating out of his hand!

He doesn't give a sh!t about anyone other than himself, and the reason he has brought the bullying up is a) to sell the book and b) because he didn't like the Twitter parody account.

To now claim what he was REALLY bothered about was those youngsters trying to break in is utter revisionist drivel dreamed up years after the event to support his position.

It's funny how such a poisonous and selfish bloke seems to have so many friends in the world of cricket and other's who will back him up.