Wow

[C_C]

The guy has talent but its too early- way too early to say how he will do.
He could pull a Vaughan in Tests or its like in ODIs...give him 30-35 Tests and around 80-100 ODIs before we start crowning him.

 

[Scaly piscine]

His ODI average will have to go down,there's no way it'll stay above 50.

I'm sure the same was said of Bevan, I think it depends on how teams bowl at him really, if they don't try to get him out early then he could possibly maintain such a high average. If he gets a string of innings where he only has 10 overs or less to bat that'll hurt his average too.

 

[Swervy]

the thing with KP is that out of any player I have seen for a good decade, he so obviously suits international cricket

I know its too early to tell, but I have a feeling in 10 or 15 years time , we may be looking back on a truely great international career

 

[BoyBrumby]

the thing with KP is that out of any player I have seen for a good decade, he so obviously suits international cricket

I know its too early to tell, but I have a feeling in 10 or 15 years time , we may be looking back on a truely great international career

He has two things in his favour: firstly an amazing eye, his best mate wouldn't accuse him of having the perfect technique, but after he's in (I have a suspicion he'll always be a poor starter) he can play his audacious shots because he seems to see the ball so early; secondly his self-belief, it's obvious that he thinks he belongs on the biggest stage, so isn't seemingly concerned about looking over his shoulder. His 158 was a triumph of a man who determined to play his own game. Possibly, as a Saffie, 16 years of us being whupped by Oz didn't weigh quite so heavily on him, either.

 

[greg]

He has two things in his favour: firstly an amazing eye, his best mate wouldn't accuse him of having the perfect technique, but after he's in (I have a suspicion he'll always be a poor starter) he can play his audacious shots because he seems to see the ball so early; secondly his self-belief, it's obvious that he thinks he belongs on the biggest stage, so isn't seemingly concerned about looking over his shoulder. His 158 was a triumph of a man who determined to play his own game. Possibly, as a Saffie, 16 years of us being whupped by Oz didn't weigh quite so heavily on him, either.

Maybe. Although the Saffers have arguably been worse chokers than England vs Australia in recent years. At least they've had a team which on paper should have been able to really challenge them.

 

[honestbharani]

Maybe. Although the Saffers have arguably been worse chokers than England vs Australia in recent years. At least they've had a team which on paper should have been able to really challenge them.

Except that, much like England, they don't have much of a clue against Warne.

 

[Top_Cat]

Why do I get the feeling that in a year's time, we may have another Balaji on our hands?

Don't get me wrong, I think he's potentially a fantastic player for England but he's barely been exposed to international cricket; let's see how his averages are after his pretty glaring weakness to full balls moving away outside off-stump is exploited over a longer period of time.

 

[luckyeddie]

Why do I get the feeling that in a year's time, we may have another Balaji on our hands?

Don't get me wrong, I think he's potentially a fantastic player for England but he's barely been exposed to international cricket; let's see how his averages are after his pretty glaring weakness to full balls moving away outside off-stump is exploited over a longer period of time.

I remember exactly the same thing being said about someone else - Viv. He was slip fodder and wouldn't amount to anything after he'd been found out outside off stump.

Sure, KP might crash and burn, but in 40 years of watching cricket, I've only seen 2 'English' batsmen who come close to his potential for creating absolute carnage out of a peaceful summer afternoon - Botham and Colin Milburn.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Why do I get the feeling that in a year's time, we may have another Balaji on our hands?

Don't get me wrong, I think he's potentially a fantastic player for England but he's barely been exposed to international cricket; let's see how his averages are after his pretty glaring weakness to full balls moving away outside off-stump is exploited over a longer period of time.

Not to mention his lack of scoring strength through the off-side. Smashing off-stump corridor balls through midwicket is flashy and can create scoring opportunities, but it will definately get you out too. Pietersen's a special talent, but I'm far from convinced he's going to be a long-term test success. As you said, we'll wait and see.

 

[greg]

Not to mention his lack of scoring strength through the off-side. Smashing off-stump corridor balls through midwicket is flashy and can create scoring opportunities, but it will definately get you out too. Pietersen's a special talent, but I'm far from convinced he's going to be a long-term test success. As you said, we'll wait and see.

Not disagreeing he remains relatively unproven, but I think he showed a fair bit of ability to score through the offside. He doesn't seem to square cut at all, which is arguably a good thing, but his back foot drive certainly doesn't seem to leave much to be desired. As with Strauss' supposed weaknessin driving half half volleys, a problem with a very full ball outside the offstump is not something to get overly worried about at test level IMO.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Not disagreeing he remains relatively unproven, but I think he showed a fair bit of ability to score through the offside. He doesn't seem to square cut at all, which is arguably a good thing, but his back foot drive certainly doesn't seem to leave much to be desired. As with Strauss' supposed weaknessin driving half half volleys, a problem with a very full ball outside the offstump is not something to get overly worried about at test level IMO.

Why? You get very full balls outside off regularly. Lee did Pietersen completely in each of the final two tests by simply pitching one up outside off and moving it away a fraction. At Trent Bridge Gilchrist caught it, and at The Oval Warne put it down. Anyway, along with the cut Pietersen's got a weak drive on the up. He plays a mile from his body when trying to drive through the off-side on the front foot, and that's another reason he's going to get out there a bit. I'm not suggesting he's a poor player, but it's not as if he's put in a flawless showing so far in test cricket.

 

[luckyeddie]

Not disagreeing he remains relatively unproven, but I think he showed a fair bit of ability to score through the offside. He doesn't seem to square cut at all, which is arguably a good thing, but his back foot drive certainly doesn't seem to leave much to be desired. As with Strauss' supposed weaknessin driving half half volleys, a problem with a very full ball outside the offstump is not something to get overly worried about at test level IMO.

Glenn McGrath didn't seem to think that Pietersen couldn't score through the off side at Lord's.

Strangely enough, in the first innings of that game - and, coincidentally, in the first innings of the second test - Pietersen scored MORE runs through the covers than he did through midwicket (another fine FaaipDeOiad theory let down gracefully ).

 

[greg]

Why? You get very full balls outside off regularly. Lee did Pietersen completely in each of the final two tests by simply pitching one up outside off and moving it away a fraction. At Trent Bridge Gilchrist caught it, and at The Oval Warne put it down. Anyway, along with the cut Pietersen's got a weak drive on the up. He plays a mile from his body when trying to drive through the off-side on the front foot, and that's another reason he's going to get out there a bit. I'm not suggesting he's a poor player, but it's not as if he's put in a flawless showing so far in test cricket.

My point is that shots such as drives on the up, or playing attacking shots to very full balls, are not shots that have to be played, especially at the start of his innings which is when the "weakness" is apparent. It's certainly nothing compared, for example, with Michael Vaughan's penchant for nicking good length balls on or around off stump. This was the same point made about Strauss and half volleys when they were raised as a "weakness" during the one dayers. In a test match, with no pressure to score, they can just be blocked back if necessary.

 

[Top_Cat]

It's certainly nothing compared, for example, with Michael Vaughan's penchant for nicking good length balls on or around off stump.

Pietersen has a similar thing too. Once bowlers have a decent look at him, we'll see how he responds. My gut says he'll get through it because he has so much raw talent but we shall see.

I remember exactly the same thing being said about someone else - Viv. He was slip fodder and wouldn't amount to anything after he'd been found out outside off stump.

And pretty much exactly that happened to Viv early on. He was good enough to get through it. We'll see if Pietersen can do the same. I'm with you; he has a very special aura about him and I hope he succeeds because for all his arrogance that everyone talks about, I think he's actually just deeply insecure and he seems to be one heck of a team-man, whilst he's amongst other equally-talented players anyway.

Not disagreeing he remains relatively unproven, but I think he showed a fair bit of ability to score through the offside. He doesn't seem to square cut at all, which is arguably a good thing,

Eh? Name me one top-line Test player who doesn't play the cut well. One can get away without playing the horizontal leg-side sides (Steve Waugh) but those players are few and far between. Not playing the cut, well, you'd have to be awfully good at other shots.

 

[greg]

Pietersen has a similar thing too. Once bowlers have a decent look at him, we'll see how he responds. My gut says he'll get through it because he has so much raw talent but we shall see.

He has a habit of nicking full balls outside the offstump. That was what the discussion was about.

Eh? Name me one top-line Test player who doesn't play the cut well. One can get away without playing the horizontal leg-side sides (Steve Waugh) but those players are few and far between. Not playing the cut, well, you'd have to be awfully good at other shots.

It's not really a case of "not playing it well". He doesn't seem to play it. The point is that he plays shot through the off side with a straight bat (which he can do to more balls than most because of his movement towards the offside). I have somewhat grave doubts about a form of attack which seeks to keep him quiet by bowling short wide balls outside the off stump ;-) There are plenty of top batsmen in the world who play the square cut. A hell of a lot of them play it in the air and get frequently caught in the gully.

 

[Top_Cat]

He has a habit of nicking full balls outside the offstump. That was what the discussion was about.

Yes and I'm saying he is vulnerable to similar deliveries to Vaughan as well. In fairness, most batsmen are. On a length outside off-stump is a high-percentage option. I get the feeling the Aussies didn't exploit this enough. Guys like Gillespie and Kasper angled the ball in, hoping that by moving across, he'd be vulnerable to the full ball on the stumps for LBW. Unfortunately for them, he nails them.

He's got such a good eye and learns so fast, though, that you get the feeling any given weakness won't stay that way for long!

 

[Barney Rubble]

Hard to believe that when he played against England's touring side in 1999 (I think), he was picked as a specialist spin bowler, and even then he hit 60-odd from number 9.

He's come a long way since then, I think it's fair to say.

 

[PY]

Yeah, changing your nationality is a pretty big thing.

I've always wondered where his spin options went, maybe he should crank his arm over before we go to Pakistan and India. Would possibly add another dimension to the attack, what do people reckon about having Michael Vaughan and him taking the 2nd spinner slot combined? I don't think it'll work but it's a school of thought!

 

[Barney Rubble]

I don't think it'll work but it's a school of thought!

Well, that it is.......

To be honest although England will certainly pick a second spinner for the two tours, it's not guaranteed they'll play him. They may argue the benefits a second spinner could provide (whoever it may be, seeing as there's no outstanding candidate) are outweighed by the disruption to the balance of the side it would cause. Firstly you have to work out which of Harmison, Hoggard and Jones to drop, secondly you have to consider the workload it'll place on the other pace bowlers - in the heat of the Sub-Continent, you can't afford to have a second spinner who turns out to be completely ineffective, as it would mean the pacers got knackered with the extra workload.

Personally, I think Vaughan could find himself doing a lot of bowling in the winter, and KP, although his bowling has gone downhill fast in recent times (2-0-22-0 against Zimbabwe's tailenders), may have to chip in, too.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Well, that it is.......

To be honest although England will certainly pick a second spinner for the two tours, it's not guaranteed they'll play him. They may argue the benefits a second spinner could provide (whoever it may be, seeing as there's no outstanding candidate) are outweighed by the disruption to the balance of the side it would cause. Firstly you have to work out which of Harmison, Hoggard and Jones to drop, secondly you have to consider the workload it'll place on the other pace bowlers - in the heat of the Sub-Continent, you can't afford to have a second spinner who turns out to be completely ineffective, as it would mean the pacers got knackered with the extra workload.

Personally, I think Vaughan could find himself doing a lot of bowling in the winter, and KP, although his bowling has gone downhill fast in recent times (2-0-22-0 against Zimbabwe's tailenders), may have to chip in, too.

My suspicion is Swann for the 2nd spinner's berth, just been watching him bowl against Kent actually. He bowls an attacking line for an offie, quite quickly but doesn't push it thru flat like a lot of spinners have a tendancy to do nowadays (a sign of playing too much OD stuff for me). His batting is useful too & it's a matter of record that Big Dunc likes his multi faceted players.

KP's bowling does seem to have gone backwards, although I am taking that on good faith because it's prob two years since I've seen him turn his arm over. He can't have impressed in the nets because I doubt he'd be backward in coming forward to offer his services.