It's Tough Being Me - The Kevin Pietersen Story

[ganeshran]

Hope its a PCB-esque retirement and KP is back within an year

 

[Pothas]

If he was that bad you don't bring him back in after 2012 probably. But I agree with what you're saying - its not clear-cut.

Yeah understand that point, they obviously thought he was worth it at the time and that now he is not. Now that could be down to his behaviour in Australia, it could be because of his form makes him not worth the trouble, or it could just be a **** decision, I don't really know.

 

[MW1304]

Just have a **** and be done with it.

A **** or a ****? The two have varying connotations.

 

[Viscount Tom]

If the Aussies can accommodate Shane Watson surely we could accommodate KP

 

[Blocky]

No they aren't. Aside from Swann though, realistically they couldn't comment either way. I fully accept it's a moot point to an extent and he may well have got worse since IPL etc but still, these guys who've shared a dressing room with him think it's a joke. Vaughan who captained him thinks it's a joke.

If he is such a dick that he can't be accommodated then he should never have been brought back. But they knew we'd have no chance in India without him. Now that we've lost The Ashes it just seems a convenient scapegoat.

Cook, who is under immense pressure on whether or not he's capable as a captain of inspiring his troops and being a guy who can turn on performances when his team isn't naturally better than the opposition probably didn't want a prominent individual with a better career to date in the dressing room. That's my take on the whole mess. As a young captain who isn't entirely charismatic - he probably worried that factions of the team would move towards Pietersen more so than him. Pietersen being a "I want to win at all costs" sort of player was probably pissed off in the dressing room and demanding more out of the players, I don't feel Cook would be.

 

[Furball]

I'm not actually convinced that Kevin Pietersen is the issue here.

Obviously this is just wild speculation on my part but I get the impression that a) Pietersen's been shockingly managed throughout his England career and b) IMO it's the Swann-led clique in the dressing room that's as much a problem in the dressing room. (ok, Swann's gone but you get my point).

Unless there's something massive that's gone on behind the scenes in Australia (not out of the question given the shambles on the field), I don't understand how you could rehabilitate KP for the India tour then bin him a year later.

 

[Blocky]

I'm not actually convinced that Kevin Pietersen is the issue here.

Obviously this is just wild speculation on my part but I get the impression that a) Pietersen's been shockingly managed throughout his England career and b) IMO it's the Swann-led clique in the dressing room that's as much a problem in the dressing room. (ok, Swann's gone but you get my point).

Unless there's something massive that's gone on behind the scenes in Australia (not out of the question given the shambles on the field), I don't understand how you could rehabilitate KP for the India tour then bin him a year later.

Obviously not familiar with the entire history of English cricket where binning their best players because the administrators favourite pet felt threatened by them.

 

[Bahnz]

Massive loss for England. Pietersen was the one English player who could produce match-winning performances regardless of playing conditions or the opposition. He was also the most entertaining batsmen in the world to watch, so I'm gutted he's gone. Still England's batting isn't as ****ed without him as some are making it out to be. Root will come right eventually if he's left down the order and given time to grow. Was a collosal ballsup moving him up the order. England are only really missing an opener and a number 3. But England have been missing a 2nd opener since Strauss' performances started tailing off in 2011, and there's nothing to say that Trott won't be able to make a comeback later in the year.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Obviously not familiar with the entire history of English cricket where binning their best players because the administrators favourite pet felt threatened by them.

In this case, that's just supposition and is just as likely to have nothing to do with this at all.

 

[Furball]

Massive loss for England. Pietersen was the one English player who could produce match-winning performances regardless of playing conditions or the opposition. He was also the most entertaining batsmen in the world to watch, so I'm gutted he's gone. Still England's batting isn't as ****ed without him as some are making it out to be. Root will come right eventually if he's left down the order and given time to grow. Was a collosal ballsup moving him up the order. England are only really missing an opener and a number 3. But England have been missing a 2nd opener since Strauss' performances started tailing off in 2011, and there's nothing to say that Trott won't be able to make a comeback later in the year.

Eh?

Pietersen and Cook have been carrying England's batting for the last 2 years.

 

[Bahnz]

Yeah they both played massive roles in England winning 5 out of 7 tests against Oz and NZ.

 

[Cabinet96]

Yeah they both played massive roles in England winning 5 out of 7 tests against Oz and NZ.

You mean when we didn't get 400 once? Just because our oppo had a few collapses doesn't mean our batting hasn't been average the last few years, aside from KP and Cook at times.

 

[L Trumper]

Interesting that you mention Ferguson actually. It occurs to me that one person probably above all others who was definitely not afraid to make decisions like this was Ferguson. Jettisoned countless star players for non-footballing reasons in his time, decisions that were almost all heavily criticised at the time on grounds similar to the reasons this decision is getting criticised. Yet those decisions basically all turned out to be correct and he was by far the most successful manager of his time. Shows the value of a settled/happy dressing room.

I don't understand how anyone can have a strong view on this either way at the moment, without some pretty reliable inside info. In reality probably none of us know what has gone on, and thus whether the decision was justified. It's not like the ECB didn't understand that in purely cricketing terms dropping him was absurd, and yet they dropped him anyway. Not to say that's necessarily the correct decision, but to me it's not obvious at all that it's the wrong one either.

Such a bull**** myth. Realistically only star player Fergie get rid of in his prime was Jaap Stam and Utd's defence was jack **** for the next 2-3 years. Idea that Fergie got rid of star players, lol. He got rid of Becks, RVN when they are clearly surplus to requirements in Man U side, besides he is managing a club side which means even if he get rid of star players he can buy new players. Comparing it to international sport is nonsensical.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Such a bull**** myth. Realistically only star player Fergie get rid of in his prime was Jaap Stam and Utd's defence was jack **** for the next 2-3 years. Idea that Fergie got rid of star players, lol. He got rid of Becks, RVN when they are clearly surplus to requirements in Man U side, besides he is managing a club side which means even if he get rid of star players he can buy new players. Comparing it to international sport is nonsensical.

I wasn't comparing it with international sport, I was using it to show the value of a cohesive dressing room. Whether he would have done the same as an international manager is anyone's guess, though his omission of Hansen in 1986 suggests it's not out of the question.

This is a cricket thread and I didn't intend to derail it but can't help pointing out that suggesting Beckham and RVN were surplus to requirements in 2002/3 and 2006 respectively is pretty laughable. Both were younger than 30 when sold, both were still key players prior to the fall-outs. RVN's record at Real Madrid after being sold indicates he was hardly finished, and Beckham had just come out of his best ever season in goal-scoring terms when they fell out. He had only been England captain for 18 months when he was sold. You've forgotten others as well such as Ince and McGrath but the key point is that someone being a key player in footballing or in this case cricketing terms does not mean it's necessarily a bad decision to get rid.

 

[Cruxdude]

Such a sad way to end the career of one of the best English batsman ever. IIRC Swann recently mentioned that KP was much better in the dressing room after his "reintegration". How inept must the English management be to screw this so bad?

 

[the big bambino]

Might end up playing for South Africa. There is a recent opening.

 

[benchmark00]

Graeme Smith?

 

[Garson007]

Laughable that some reports cite his age as a reason. Ffs, he's not even close to anywhere near 40.

 

[Jono]

Graeme Smith?

Haters gonna hate.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Ah, this is horrible, horrible news.
I can't believe the decision honestly, but even though KP is no doubt a massive ****, it just looks to me as though he's been made a scapegoat here. Maybe in the coming weeks, we'll get some info on how KP completely destroyed morale in the dressing room during the Ashes, but right now, it just looks as though the ECB have thought to themselves after they've just suffered arguably the worst ashes defeat in history, and need to show the world that they're making changes. And the change is to drop the one word class batsman who barely months ago played the three greatest innings of the year? How does that make sense? Rebuilding is a fine and dandy word to use, but as it is, the side is filled with incompetent and/or extremely young batsmen as it is. The only reason England have been doing well over the last few years is because of Cook's consistency, and KP producing those miracle knocks out of nowhere. If it wasn't for him, England would have lost in SL, lost in India, and whitewashed by SA at home. The England team is already in the rebuilding phase... That doesn't mean they need to drop experienced players, far less their best one. I refuse to believe his influence on the team is bad enough to negate his brilliant batting. No way.

And is there a tribute thread somewhere? Can't see it. I'll just say this here then:

Pietersen is one of my favourite batsmen of the last 20 years. While growing up, I'd always here how Viv Richards would tear apart the fastest bowlers with utter contempt and dominate them irrespective of the conditions or opposition. As a young, stupid indian fan, I kept waiting for Sachin to do something like that, buying into the "Master blaster" nonsense, before I slowly realised to my disappointment that there's no one who fits that vision of a tall powerful batsman arrogantly swatting fast bowlers around the ground as if he has no care in the world. That was when I saw Pietersen baseball bat a perfectly good ball from Mcgrath straight down the ground in the 2005 Ashes. Love at first sight really. And no, while he was never consistent enough to be really called Viv's successor, at his best, there was no more thrilling sight for me in world cricket. He could look like a numpty at his worst against Ajmal in the UAE but then would utterly manhandle the generation greatest bowler, Steyn, in a way that I haven't seen anyone do. Sehwag has a triple against Steyn, and even he didn't score as many runs off Steyn as KP did at Headingley. And he's completely unique in that it didn't matter to him whether the ball swung, or if it was a complete bunsen of a pitch.. If he was on his game, the conditions became totally irrelevant. Very very few batsmen have ever given me that feeling of fear when he was in the zone that no matter what we do, he's going to smash us into oblivion. Massive loss to cricket and for everyone who isn't a boring bastard and appreciates a bit of showmanship in batting