Alastair Cook vs Kevin Pietersen

[PlayerComparisons]

Two guys that averaged around the same. Pietersen had the higher strike rate but Cook had the harder batting position and better longevity.

 

[fredfertang]

Cook is a thoroughly likeable bloke, whereas KP is a **** of the highest order

 

[BazBall21]

Pietersen.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Pietersen.

Thought he’d win this easily tbh

 

[The Sean]

Thought he’d win this easily tbh

TBF I think had your question been who was more talented/had the higher ceiling/played the more ridiculous innings then yeah it's KP. But who had the greater Test career? It's Cook.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

TBF I think had your question been who was more talented/had the higher ceiling/played the more ridiculous innings then yeah it's KP. But who had the greater Test career? It's Cook.

A bit like Anderson v Broad although the difference is probably smaller here

 

[shortpitched713]

I think Pietersen was better. More aggressive too, took the fight to bowlers more often. Scored enough more than Cook, just, to overcome the opener tax, taking into consideration the importance of the way he scored his runs. I like aggressive batsmen, and I rate Pietersen.

 

[BazBall21]

The way I see it is Cook was more reliable on flat pitches and better at grinding down medicore attacks. But Pietersen was the better player against quality attacks which counts for more when their averages are in a similar bracket. Not to bring Cook down though, who was certainly very good and had a terrific career.

 

[Red_Ink_Squid]

The way I see it is Cook was more reliable on flat pitches and better at grinding down medicore attacks. But Pietersen was the better player against quality attacks which counts for more when their averages are in a similar bracket. Not to bring Cook down though, who was certainly very good and had a terrific career.

I agree with what you say about Cook being better against average attacks and Pietersen better against quality attacks. But should the latter count for more?

If we were selecting a team for a hypothetical ATG tournament or something then yes, Pietersen would make sense for that reason. But in assessing which was the better Test player, it's really valuable to be reliably excellent against regular Test attacks.

 

[Ali TT]

Cook is a thoroughly likeable bloke, whereas KP is a **** of the highest order

Don't buy that about Cook. In the fall out in 2013/14, they both manipulated the situation to get what they wanted just that Cook does it quietly while KP shoots his mouth off. The former is a more preferred way of doing things in the upper echelons of English cricket...

In terms of who was the best, Cook in Asia, KP everywhere else. For an English opener, the surprising thing about Cook is that he is the best player of spin we've produced in a helluva long time.

 

[sledger]

Pietersen the more talented, but Cook ultimately actually achieved far more according to more or less every useful metric.

 

[BazBall21]

I agree with what you say about Cook being better against average attacks and Pietersen better against quality attacks. But should the latter count for more?

If we were selecting a team for a hypothetical ATG tournament or something then yes, Pietersen would make sense for that reason. But in assessing which was the better Test player, it's really valuable to be reliably excellent against regular Test attacks.

Two things

1) I don't think Cook being a more reliable presence on flat tracks isn't important. I think that Pietersen being better against quality pace is more important. I will explain why I think that below.

2) I wouldn't necessarily think KP's ability against good attacks was a difference maker if Cook averaged say five runs more than him. But he didn't. Pietersen has nine 150+ scores and was pretty adept at bullying a poor WI side. This implies he was still very good at cashing in. Against good attacks, KP excelled a lot more frequently than Cook. So I think the gap between them against the best compared to the gap between them at capitalising is most likely bigger and more definitive.

This is why I tend to take the guy who was better against quality bowlers/attacks when we're comparing two very good or two great players because you tend to find the guy who was 2nd best when it comes to cashing in was still very good at it.

Furthermore, while pointing to Cook's opener tax is a valid point, KP would still be the better middle-order player.

 

[Majestic]

I rate KP higher than Clarke, Cook and Amla due to his ability to produce a special knock every now and then which often changes the course of the match.

Shane Warne in late 2000s said, Tendulkar and Lara were at another level to other batsman he bowled. Post those two, there was Kevin Pietersen who was outstanding on his day too. So, one can think how good KP was.

 

[number11]

Easy. KP was a genius. Cook was not.

 

[PlayerComparisons]

Didn’t expect Cook to win this! Wonder if he’d beat Gooch and Gower

 

[BazBall21]

Didn’t expect Cook to win this! Wonder if he’d beat Gooch and Gower

12 months ago I reckon he wouldn't have. Pietersen's stock seems to have taken a hit on here. It sometimes happens to aggressive batsmen.

 

[BazBall21]

I don't think Gower is rated very highly here. He's been slapped by Gooch and Laxman. Think Cook would turn him over. Gooch v Cook would not only be a more competitive poll but it's also opener v opener. You might get flagged because technically there's already been a Gooch v Cook contest but that was posted back in 2011 so you shouldn't be.

 

[BazBall21]

Two things

1) I don't think Cook being a more reliable presence on flat tracks isn't important. I think that Pietersen being better against quality pace is more important. I will explain why I think that below.

2) I wouldn't necessarily think KP's ability against good attacks was a difference maker if Cook averaged say five runs more than him. But he didn't. Pietersen has nine 150+ scores and was pretty adept at bullying a poor WI side. This implies he was still very good at cashing in. Against good attacks, KP excelled a lot more frequently than Cook. So I think the gap between them against the best compared to the gap between them at capitalising is most likely bigger and more definitive.

This is why I tend to take the guy who was better against quality bowlers/attacks when we're comparing two very good or two great players because you tend to find the guy who was 2nd best when it comes to cashing in was still very good at it.

Furthermore, while pointing to Cook's opener tax is a valid point, KP would still be the better middle-order player.

10 150+ scores* I should say.

 

[Chin Music]

I chose Pietersen. I see the arguments over longitivity but that meant Cook got 10 more test tons over 57 more tests. That's not something I would be highlighting as a point of difference. Pietersen didn't make his test debut until he was 25 for qualification reasons. Between 2005 and 2009 there was no contest. Pietersen was at a level that I don't think any batter before or since in England colours has reached in terms of the ability to take apart a top class attack in the time that I have watched cricket. Sure Pietersen declined and I don't think was the same player over the last few years, especially when he did his knee in on the NZ tour. However, Cook actually was a fairly average player give or take the odd innings here or there in his last few years after his technique was utterly dissected by Ryan Harris in the 2013 home Ashes series and by Harris and Johnson away. So I don't buy the extra runs/tons were anything special when he was utterly exposed by that pair and then continued to struggle when faced with the better quick bowlers around at that period.

 

[Chin Music]

I don't think Gower is rated very highly here. He's been slapped by Gooch and Laxman. Think Cook would turn him over. Gooch v Cook would not only be a more competitive poll but it's also opener v opener. You might get flagged because technically there's already been a Gooch v Cook contest but that was posted back in 2011 so you shouldn't be.

I'm a huge Gower fan, that would be recency bias because I suspect not so many folk would necessarily remember Gower too well. Cook never reached the levels that Gooch did in the early 90s with levels of centuries against good attacks that was beyond what Cook did achieve.