Trouble in the English camp : Pietersen Vs Moores!?

[superkingdave]

The kiss or the car?

Well FWIW the car was some kind of middle of the road estate car

 

[four_or_six]

Why need a stop gap coach? Why don't go without a coach at all? India did for almost an year in 2007, and won in England, the T20 cup, lost in Aus 2-1 and won the CB series. I think the players are mentally stuffed at this level to go without coaching atleast for the short term.

Well someone will go as some kind of manager or something. Not necessarily a coach I suppose.

 

[Bob Bamber]

Depends if he wants a test career or the money, I guess. He could sign as a local for one of the SA franchises, get IPL clearance from the SA board with his value increased as he'd be available for the whole tournament & then even sign for Hants or another county as an overseas player.

In four years he'd only be 32, so it might not even be the end of his test career; he could conceivably have another five years at the top once he'd done his residence for SA. Doubtless he's burnt a few bridges yarp-side, but genius writes its own rules, as they say.

He won't need to re-gain his residence, I just don't know how it'd work. Technically if Pietersen abandones England totally, theres nothing to stop him playing for South Africa against Australia in the series in South Africa (As far as I know there's no cricketing rule stopping you representing a country that you have residence in).

And even if he doesn't (which to be fair I don't think he will), is a coach really going to want to pick him? OK he's a fantastic player, but the disruption of harmony in the dressing room... and the fact that if he gets back in he might feel that he's bigger than the next coach too...

So Strauss for the test captaincy. Seems a pretty obvious move - he's been vice captain/captain on and off ever since Trescothick stopped playing. We're back onto the split captaincy idea again. Twenty20 is a official form of the game now (as much as people might start spewing at the idea). Strauss (not that he needed to) admitted that he's useless as a Twenty20 player. If it were me I'd give it to Collingwood for the West Indies matches as a stand-in - theres no other obvious candidate in the side - other than Cook (Not officially in the One Day squad - but I don't see anything wrong with keeping him over there if you wanted him). There's no obvious candidate within the setup itself, I'll go back to the Rob Key idea for the One Day Captaincy. There aren't many better candidates to do the job at the moment, and he might be able to solve the top of the order issue (Joe Denly too if you're really feeling up for it.

 

[wpdavid]

Good Thing for English Cricket. KP doesn't take 'No' very well and this situation was going to happen sooner or later. I am glad that it happened sooner rather than later. Moores is a victim of KP's SuperPower. Hard to blame ECB when you have a captain who behaves like a 5 year old who is denied his toys.

That is so true. If it wasn't disaffection with Moores, it would have been something else - not enough time with IPL, touring schedules, choice of players, choice of captain if he hadn't been made captain, money, etc, etc. Even if we completely lose him as a player, the long term consequences of giving in to him would have been far worse. And we knew that 4 years ago: it was only a matter of what & when.

 

[Pothas]

Well, I wasn't saying I would select either of them but they are being touted and if they want something familiar, they could go back to Vaughan. As for Key, how he doesn't get more of a say is a mystery to me. He would slot in the side as a batsman at no. 3 and is easily the best English captain around ATM.

He doesnt get more of a say because he is not a test class batsman, never has and never will be.
Also as has already been mentioned he was captain as Kent were relegated last season and he only averaged around 30 with the bat.

 

[Prince EWS]

Will Collingwood even take the ODI captaincy back if offered? He did step down from the position not long ago. I suppose one could argue he decided to do that (or indeed was nudged) once Pietersen became Test captain purely to avoid the split captaincy issue but I get the feeling there was more to it than that.

Strauss as Test captain is a given, for mine. Anyone else would be a mistake IMO, particularly someone from outside the squad like Vaughan or Key. ODI captaincy is perhaps a more intriguing if less important issue.

 

[Pothas]

I guess they will try and put Strauss back into the ODI side, they seemed to make the decision after Vaughan quit that they wanted the same captain in both forms of the game.
If they don't put Strauss back in the one day side there are very few options given that not many players are secure in the ODI side. I guess it might end of being Flintoff....

 

[Prince EWS]

I guess they will try and put Strauss back into the ODI side, they seemed to make the decision after Vaughan quit that they wanted the same captain in both forms of the game.
If they don't put Strauss back in the one day side there are very few options given that not many players are secure in the ODI side. I guess it might end of being Flintoff....

Selecting someone in the ODI side merely because they're the Test captain would be wrong IMO, but depriving someone of the Test captaincy merely because they aren't in the ODI side would be wrong on so many more levels.

It's not even that I think Strauss would be so much worse than the other top order batsmen England pick in ODIs that makes me so much against his ODI selection; it's the fact that playing ODIs seems to have a negative impact on his Test game. Hopefully, if he is given captaincy in both formats, he can successfully juggle the captaincy and separate his ODI game from his Test game. Given he couldn't do the latter even without the captaincy, though, it doesn't seem likely to me.

Flintoff hasn't got too much of a mention so far but as much as I think it'd be a bad move, it wouldn't shock me that much if he got the gig.

 

[grecian]

Utterly bizarre, but on the good side at least there's not an important series coming up in the summer

Mind you the way we're self-destructing I reckon we'll probably lose to the Windies twice before we get to our Ashes humiliation.

 

[Pothas]

Selecting someone in the ODI side merely because they're the Test captain would be wrong IMO, but depriving someone of the Test captaincy merely because they aren't in the ODI side would be wrong on so many more levels.

It's not even that I think Strauss would be so much worse than the other top order batsmen England pick in ODIs that makes me so much against his ODI selection; it's the fact that playing ODIs seems to have a negative impact on his Test game. Hopefully, if he is given captaincy in both formats, he can successfully juggle the captaincy and separate his ODI game from his Test game. Given he couldn't do the latter even without the captaincy, though, it doesn't seem likely to me.

Flintoff hasn't got too much of a mention so far but as much as I think it'd be a bad move, it wouldn't shock me that much if he got the gig.

Certain he will not get the Test job but if Strauss isn't selected for the ODI side then who else is there? Collingwood, Pietersen and Flintoff are the only 3 players who are secure in the side, if Collingwood is unwilling then who else is there?

 

[BoyBrumby]

He won't need to re-gain his residence, I just don't know how it'd work. Technically if Pietersen abandones England totally, theres nothing to stop him playing for South Africa against Australia in the series in South Africa (As far as I know there's no cricketing rule stopping you representing a country that you have residence in).

He will, yeah. Players can't have played for another test nation in the four years immediately before their selection (linky):

A. Core Nationality Criteria

A1. A national of the country (as defined by the country); or

A2. Born in the country; or

A3. Resident in the country for at least 183 days in each of the immediately preceding seven years; or

A4. Resident in the country for at least 183 days in each of the immediately preceding four years (some restrictions for Associates and Affliates detailed below).

B. Restrictions

B1. The player must not have represented another ICC member at Under 19 level or above - in an ICC sanctioned match (e.g. in a test match, ODI, ICC Global or Regional event) - in the immediately preceding four years (at Under 19 level or above).

 

[grecian]

Sky are saying Strauss has the captaincy.

 

[GIMH]

But then we'd have a **** batsman back in the side.

What's with the 'we, closet England fan?

Flintoff hasn't got too much of a mention so far but as much as I think it'd be a bad move, it wouldn't shock me that much if he got the gig.

Nah, Flintoff wouldn't take it I don't think.

Actually, I'd make Strauss Test Skipper and Flintoff ODI skipper

 

[Prince EWS]

What's with the 'we, closet England fan?





Nah, Flintoff wouldn't take it I don't think.

Actually, I'd make Strauss Test Skipper and Flintoff ODI skipper

I was referring specifically to the ODI captaincy when I mentioned Flintoff. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

 

[Jamee999]

Converting into Islam would be a huge first step.

Seriously, what a comedy!

Mohammad Kevin?

He will, yeah. Players can't have played for another test nation in the four years immediately before their selection (linky):

A. Core Nationality Criteria

A1. A national of the country (as defined by the country); or

A2. Born in the country; or

A3. Resident in the country for at least 183 days in each of the immediately preceding seven years; or

A4. Resident in the country for at least 183 days in each of the immediately preceding four years (some restrictions for Associates and Affliates detailed below).

B. Restrictions

B1. The player must not have represented another ICC member at Under 19 level or above - in an ICC sanctioned match (e.g. in a test match, ODI, ICC Global or Regional event) - in the immediately preceding four years (at Under 19 level or above).

Technically then, he wouldn't have to regain residence, as it says "or", as he was born in South Africa, he could live where ever...



And obviously, I'm pissed off beyond belief, my favourite player has done something as stupid as this, lost the captaincy, etc. etc.

 

[Prince EWS]

Technically then, he wouldn't have to regain residence, as it says "or", as he was born in South Africa, he could live where ever....

Nah, the "or" only refers to the "core nationality criteria" part (ie. Section A). If you fail the "restrictions" part, you're ineligible.

 

[G.I.Joe]

Jeez, looks like I'm the only one here who thinks the ECB have made a mistake by forcing Pietersen into a situation where he had to tender his resignation? Dropping a player you know the captain wants, by holding a selection meeting that doesn't involve the captain was a low blow.

 

[pskov]

An oddly gaunt looking Atherton talking now on Sky Sports News saying it's all the ECB's fault. What did they expect when they appointed KP knowing he didn't get on with Moores, plus that the ECb's decision to originally give Moores the job without interviewing any other candidates was wrong.

 

[GIMH]

I was referring specifically to the ODI captaincy when I mentioned Flintoff. Sorry if I didn't make that clear.

Ah sorry. Don't think that would be the worst thing in the world as long as he stays away from the Test job

 

[GIMH]

What odds on a Pietersen u-turn, folk?