Cricket
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 204 comments are related to the topic:
KP commits to england in all forms of cricket
KP commits to england in all forms of cricket
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 204
|
By:
Why should KP show text messages he has sent privately to his peers? If I text my workmates or people in the same industry but another company about how useless my bosses are, then that is between me and those who I send the messages. If my boss didn't want to be referred to as rubbish, useless, inept or whatever then they should pull their socks up and do their job better.
|
|
By:
firstly, they aren't "his peers". that's the whole point. his peers are the centrally contracted members of the england test cricket team.
the people he sent the texts to are the opposition. who we are currently playing in a massive test series. secondly, they are not private. whether they were intended to be or not, is neither here nor there. their existence is now known by anyone who has taken an interest. as i said, it tricky if he did it to has team, but manageable. it's deserving of a stern reprimand if he did it in the press. it is unacceptable to do so with the opposition. if you did it in the army, you'd be up for treason. if you did in politics you'd be permanently ejected from your party. |
|
By:
and it is that precise element of perceived betrayal that appears to be so damaging.
|
|
By:
It's just text messages to people he plays cricket against. Why people want to make a big song and dance about it talking pap about it being a betrayal or treason need to grow a pair, man up and stop acting like kids..
|
|
By:
yes totally agree. texts have been taken out of context and blown way out of proportion.
|
|
By:
Texts are a red herring. I doubt Strauss gives a sh1t what Pietersen thinks of him so long as he turns up and performs for the team. The issue is clearly between ECB and Pietersen.
|
|
By:
All pretty pathetic.
|
|
By:
Re Broad statement, and as someone famously said long ago in another infamous saga 'Well he would say that wouldn't he?'
|
|
By:
Cubanpete 14 Aug 12 19:27
It's just text messages to people he plays cricket against. Why people want to make a big song and dance about it talking pap about it being a betrayal or treason need to grow a pair, man up and stop acting like kids.. i don't entirely disagree with running it like that. but that's evidently not how the team is run. and how it's run is something they've thought about and decided upon and everyone team member is aware of. and they're not going to change that in light of what KP has done. so he needs to comply with what he's been asked to do. he may not agree with that, you may not either, but he's been asked to do something by his employer as a condition of his future employment. and he's decided not to. i don't see how the blame lies with the ecb. |
|
By:
.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/england/content/current/story/577393.html Pietersen apologises to the ECB David Hopps and George Dobell August 14, 2012 Be the first to comment | Login via | Text size: A | A Kevin Pietersen fell to the second ball of day four, England v South Africa, 2nd Investec Test, Headingley, 4th day, August 5, 2012 Has Kevin Pietersen been able to save his England career? © AFP Enlarge Related Links Players/Officials: Kevin Pietersen Teams: England Kevin Pietersen has apologised to the ECB over the derogatory text messages that he sent about members of the England dressing room to South Africa players in a last-ditch attempt to gain forgiveness and be selected for World Twenty20 in Sri Lanka. Pietersen and his representatives were waiting on Tuesday evening for the ECB to respond to his gesture with Saturday's deadline for naming England's World Twenty20 party looming ever closer. The apology presumably constituted an admission of guilt and as such leaves him at risk of a heavy fine, a suspension or both. If England's managing director, Hugh Morris, continues to pursue a hard line it could automatically rule him out of a tournament in which he desperately wants to take part in. The ECB would make no official comment on Wednesday night, perhaps recognising that leaks in the past have been unhelpful in the reconciliation process. ESPNcricinfo understands a decision, nevertheless, is expected on Wednesday, at which point extensive statements from both sides can be anticipated. There was a growing sense at Lord's of the need to settle the issue before the final Test against South Africa at Lord's which begins on Thursday. England, 1-0 down in the series, need to win the Test to retain their status as the No 1 Test side in the world. The ECB have failed to make Pietersen available for Surrey in their vital relegation championship match against Middlesex, at the Oval, beginning on Wednesday, as both parties recognised that it would be in appropriate as confidential negotiations were reaching a delicate stage. The decision for the ECB was when to replace punishment with rehabilitation. In another development in the Pietersen soap opera, Stuart Broad issued a statement denying any part in the creation of a parody Twitter account that so infuriated Pietersen and led him to suspect that his England team-mates were secretly deriding him. Broad, the England Twenty20 International captain, and Alex Hales, who took Pietersen's place at the top of the order in England's T20 side, were both alleged to have been involved in the account by Pietersen's friend, the chatshow host Piers Morgan. The real creator of the parody account, Richard Bailey, came forward on Monday and not only apologised for the trouble he had caused, but clarified that he had worked alone. While Bailey is a friend of Broad and Hales, all parties insist that no professional players were in any way involved either in setting up the account or supplying information. "Following last night's statement by Mr Richard Bailey that he was responsible for creating a parody Twitter account in Kevin Pietersen's name, I would like to confirm that I had no involvement in this whatsoever," Broad said "I met with the Managing Director, England Cricket, Hugh Morris this morning and assured him that I did not play any role in the creation of this account or provide Mr Bailey with any information regarding Kevin Pietersen or the England team. "As has been widely reported Mr Bailey is a friend of mine, but we had no conversations regarding this issue at all and I am pleased that he has now decided to close the parody account down." Broad's words echo the results of an ESPNcricinfo investigations last week that identified the creator of the parody account, but found no evidence that any England player had been actively involved in it at any stage. That information was communicated to senior officials of the ECB. Morris added: "Having discussed this matter with Stuart, I am fully satisfied that he acted in a professional manner at all times and did not breach any confidences regarding fellow England players. "ECB also accepts the apology Mr Bailey offered last night to the England team via his Twitter account and his re-assurances that no professional cricketers were involved in the creation of this site." David Hopps is UK editor of ESPNcricinfo and George Dobell is senior correspondent © ESPN EMEA Ltd. |
|
By:
In response to something raised earlier in this thread, Team Eradicate has just checked the England performances with and without Pietersen since his debuts in different formats.
Tests He has missed only 3 tests since his debut, all in the 2009 Ashes against Australia. Without him, England drew at Edgbaston, were soundly beaten at Leeds, and won comfortably at The Oval. It would be difficult to draw meaningful conclusions from that, but it does show the team was capable of winning a big test match without Pietersen. There were also several mitigating circumstances in the match lost at Leeds beside Pietersen's absence. Flintoff missed, Prior had a back spasm just before the match, this threw England into turmoil. But you could not say based on that that there was a noticeable drop in team performance without Pietersen. ODI's Since Pietersen's debut, and excluding wins against minnows, England have won 64 and lost 83 ODI's overall. With Pietersen, England have won 40 matches, and lost 61. So without Pietersen, by this criteria, England have won 23 and lost 22. Those figures suggest he is not only not missed, but the team performs better without Pietersen in this format. Without Pietersen the winning percentage is 51%, without him it drops appreciably to 39%. Team Eradicate did not dig deeper to see if the opposition were stronger on average when he played, maybe if someone thinks Pietersen is of value to the England team they might care to do that. Team Eradicate does not believe there is any noticeable positive influence on the team's results when Pietersen plays. If you had some way of trading him in a market place, you would moneyball him the heck off your list, especially in this format. T20 England have won 21, lost 19 of these. When Pietersen has played, they have won 17, lost 17. 50% win ratio. So without Pietersen, win 4, lose 2. 66% win ratio. Anyone claiming Pietersen has a positive influence on England's results would need to explain why they win more often with him out of the team than in it, because over the course of his career, that is precisely what has happened. Pietersen, now you have really been Eradicated, moneyball style.  |
|
By:
Broad the blue eyed boy, and favoured son of English cricket.
Whether he is abusing umpires, stamping on the ball, sledging opponents or parodying team mates, Broad always gets away with his bad behaviour! On the day the account was created there are plenty of photos to prove he was with the creator. and he even tweeted that Richard Bailey was a "genius". Whats that if not a wink to the KP Genius account? |
|
By:
If KP did criticise Strauss he has a point.
Can't score runs and cannot captain. Shouldn't be in the team. that said is it really the ECB's business how each person uses their phone? They are on dangerous ground here. |
|
By:
There's a lot of uncomfortable information coming out about that Twitter account Villareally. Some tech nerds are claiming Broad and Swann started following that now defunct Twitter account very early upon its creation, days before the first tweet was sent. I'm not sure how these tech nerds are establishing this so-called fact, but if it's true it doesn't look pretty.
|
|
By:
keep him out of the team forever
|
|
By:
I think the ECB/Flower/Morris were basically correct in dropping KP, but I want to see him back in the team. Watched today's press conference and don't like the sound of Strauss' tone. He seems really, really p1ssed off. The vibes of the other players in recent days suggests the rift is pretty wide - anyone who thinks this is just about a few text messages look much mistaken.
|
|
By:
well if they want him out permanently just say so and do it. why all this tap dancing around the situation and using a ludicrous reason to leave him out for tomorrow ?
|
|
By:
Got to feel that if 5 or 6 players in the England test team had multi million IPL contracts this whole scenario would have played out completely differently. Clearly KP is his own worst enemy with his prima donna tendancies but i'll be amazed if he hasnt been isolated just as much by the green eyed monster lurking in the dressing room.
|
|
By:
KP has acted like a total cretin over the last few weeks from his one day retirement to his IPL demands, from his tv interviews to his text messages. I think they had every justification leaving him out for this test, I just hope they can find a way back for him. I agree with crookedarm that some of his teammates appear to have behaved pretty poorly themselves and hope they grow up a bit as well.
|
|
By:
mafeking
Date Joined: 24 Sep 02 Add contact | Send message 15 Aug 12 13:16 Joined: 24 Sep 02 | Topic/replies: 10,408 | Blogger: mafeking's blog well if they want him out permanently just say so and do it. why all this tap dancing around the situation and using a ludicrous reason to leave him out for tomorrow ? Exactly. |
|
By:
i still wonder why Swann was dropped as it wasn't cricketing reasons
changing room bust up? |
|
By:
Very possibly - it seemed such a strange decision by England, totally against their longstanding selection policy.
|
|
By:
Eradicate,
Thanks for those stats. Its is as I suspected the guy has a negative influence on the team. Without him there other people get the chance to come out of the woodwork and play better. I dont think he should have ever been selected again since he lost the captain role. |
|
By:
England wouldn't still be clinging to their number one status if Pietersen had missed the second test. They would be 2-0 down already. And if I wasn't heavy on the draw, I'd be cheering the Saffers every inch of the way to smash the traitors who stabbed KP in the back. There's bound to plenty of opportunity for me to move my book around though.
Swann certainly has plenty to say for himself for someone so average. He might be the best spin bowler in England, but that's like a morbidly obese person at a Weight Watchers meeting boasting they are the slimmest around. And after cheering Broad's wickets in the second test, I'm now going to joy in him getting carted around the ground for what I hope will be a wicketless century. |
|
By:
You are welcome Insider Trader.
I would think a lot of people who make claims such as "Pietersen is a match winner," "Pietersen is England's only top class player" and the like would be surprised at those statistics. It would be good if some of the Pietersen apologists like Rock Monkey and Max and Paddy got on here and explained to us why England appear to achieve better results without him in the team. And I am interested in the opinions of people as to what should be done with these players who appear to be high achievers by traditional measures, yet seem to cause their team to underperform. Should they be dropped, remodelled, or allowed to carry on as they have been going? Our view at Eradicate House is that all relevant factors should be taken into account in team selection. Form, ability, future planning, attitude, effort, team ethic, team balance, opposition, all these things should be considered and weighed. But the effect a player has on team results should be monitored and taken into consideration, and to a much greater extent than is apparently the case most of the time in cricket. We think the right thing has been done here, but in the wrong year, coming about 7 years too late. |
|
By:
problem with statistics though is you can manipulate them to your story. Ultimately, KP is all about excitement and getting more people watching cricket. He mightn't be as good as most think he is on average but he's your consummate entertainer.
|
|
By:
If you believe that Nigel, then you might be so kind as to un-manipulate the statistics for us so that we have the correct picture.
For as unclear as statistics can be without sensible interpretation, people's unsupported perceptions are never going to as persuasive as a fair analysis of hard facts. If you think the with and without Pietersen figures above give an incorrect picture of his worth, explain why.... |
|
By:
EnvyMyGreen
15 Aug 12 16:55 Joined: 03 Aug 12 | Topic/replies: 687 | Blogger: EnvyMyGreen's blog England wouldn't still be clinging to their number one status if Pietersen had missed the second test. They would be 2-0 down already. ... Why? Are you saying if he wasnt there someone else wouldnt have scored like they have in countless matches KP has failed in? Take him out of the dressing room and everyone else might do better. |
|
By:
Erad - I have wildly better things to do with my time however I'm 100% certain I could produce stats to show anything I wanted to.
|
|
By:
Nigel - I am sorry to inform you that you nothing better to do with your time than analyse data. What in the world could be better than that?
Crazy people on here. |
|
By:
"Why? Are you saying if he wasnt there someone else wouldnt have scored like they have in countless matches KP has failed in? Take him out of the dressing room and everyone else might do better."
They get their chance to prove that starting tomorrow. And several of them have certainly been talking a good game since KP was dropped. I for one have the popcorn ready and look forward to being thoroughly entertained.  |
|
By:
I am not a "KP apologist". I just think he's the best player in the England team.
The only England batsman in the last 40 years with a better average than Pietersen is Jonathan Trott, and he's going through a pretty lean run at the moment. Pietersen is one century away from equalling the record for the most hundreds by an England batsman. He has scored three double hundreds - more than any England batsman except Hammond and Hutton. As for claiming that England do better without him, you are referring to ODI (and possibly T20) results. With Pietersen in the team, England have won the Ashes for the first time in 16 years; they have won the Ashes in Australia for the first time in 24 years; and they have become the best Test team in the world. They would not have done all that with Graham Thorpe (in 2005) or Ravi Bopara (in 2010 and 2011) in the side in place of Pietersen. And if some players were to perform better when Pietersen was not in the team, then they should ask themselves why they don't produce the same sort of displays all the time. Pietersen cannot be blamed for their apparent weaknesses! Here's an interesting stat for you: Andrew Strauss has won two man of the match awards in 99 Tests, and none since 2004. Pietersen has won nine awards in 88 Tests. He is a proven match-winner, and no matter what happens over the next few days at Lord's, England are a worse team without him. |
|
By:
that's a pretty amazing stat about strauss and MOM awards considering how batsman skewed they generally are
|
|
By:
and england would have won probably half the matches he's played
|
|
By:
They would not have done all that with Graham Thorpe (in 2005) or Ravi Bopara (in 2010 and 2011) in the side in place of Pietersen.
i don't agree. in fact, i'm sorry but that's total, unmitigated crap. 2011: Brisbane, 36 in a draw Adelaide: a brilliant double ton, but our bowlers won the match by restricting them on a very easy deck. Perth: duck and 3 Melbourne: Anderson and Trott skittling them for under a hundred won us the match Sydney: Bowlers again with Cook, Bell and Prior getting the runs. so, one double ton in a declared innings. not even close to being a decisive factor in the series 2009: Cardiff: 8 in the second innings Lord's: nothing remarkable. Bowlers won it with Strauss' big ton in the 1st innings. Edgbaston: absent Leeds: absent Oval: absent contributed practically nothing to the series victory. 2006/7 We were flayed by the convicts. Maybe if i'd been batting instead of him, you'd have got on the golf course a day earlier once or twice. 2005 Lord's: Couple of feisty 50s, but we still got rooted. Edgbaston: a good 70 in the 1st, but nothing standout, was an all round effort, with trescothick and flintoff the pivotal performers. Old Trafford: Vaughan, Jones, Strauss and Flintoff being the architects of just missing out on the win. Trent Bridge: nothing special, Jones and Flintoff the bigger performers. Oval: Finally a contender for helping us draw a match which we might have lost. but i'm not going to argue that it's unequivocal. It's by no means absurd to suggest that shagger, who played warne exceptionally well throughout his career, could have bedded down for long enough KP is very very good but he's not the facking messiah everyone is making him out to be. our bowlers have won us far more test matches than he has. |
|
By:
the double in adelaide and especially the pace at which he scored it was vital. it absolutely pished down for the rest of the day about an hour after england won. who knows what would have happened if they'd escaped with a draw ?
|
|
By:
our bowling them out after they'd won the toss and chose to bat in under a day was just as vital.
swann was vital on the last day. i'll agree though, in particular, the second hundred in his double was just as important. |
|
By:
no arguments there. bowling a side out for 250 first up in adelaide is like bowling a side out for 150 on most grounds. 450 is an absolute bare minimum first dig
|
|
By:
I owe you an apology here Max and Paddy. I should never have described you as an apologist for Pietersen.
Cheerleader in chief would be a fairer description. You seem to use several aspects of a batsman's career to judge his worth. First, his batting average. Or more correctly, the amount of runs he has scored per dismissal over his whole career. By this criteria you have Trott ahead of him. That would seem a fairly crude and antiquated way way to measure a player's worth to me. The average itself tells you nothing of when the runs have been scored and the effect on results. Then you move on to centuries scored. Why should this be of any significance? It certainly should not be of greater significance for instance than scores under 10, of which Pietersen has 36 from 151 test innings. So about once every four innings he is dismissed under 10. Whereas sometimes the value of a century in relation to the outcome of a match can be questionable, dismissals under 10 would almost always be significant. Then you quote double centuries. Pietersen's first came against WI at Leeds. Had he not made a single run in that match the result would unarguably have been precisely the same, so it has no significance in relation to the match result. His second, against Australia in Adelaide was significant in influencing the result, but not moreso than the contributions of Anderson, Cook, and Swan in the same match. His third, at Lord's v India, was again very significant, but hardly more so than the contributions of Broad and Prior in the same fixture. Pietersen has been dismissed 18 times for 2 or less in test cricket by the way. Then you list the team achievements with Pietersen in the team. Chief amongst these is England winning the Ashes in 2005 and 2010/11. Yet they also effectively won the Ashes in 2009 without him, and lost an Ashes series 5-0 with him in the team. So how do the team achievements you quote count toward establishing the team performs better with him than without him? Then you mention man of the match awards. It stands to reason that a performer like Pietersen will win a lot of Man of the Match awards, because he catches the eye with his best performances, but does not get any penalty towards earning these awards for his very high frequency of low scores, most of which are as damaging to his team as his big scores are useful. If Pietersen is a proven match winner,(I cannot be sure exactly what you mean by that - a person who is responsible for winning a single test from 500 could be said to be a proven match winner) where are all these matches he has won? And does the same hold for him in ODI cricket, is he a proven match winner there as well? Team Eradicate does not think so. |
|
By:
DStyle - I've been a sports journalist for 15 years and I have never been as economical with the facts as you have been there! You have ignored:
:: His brilliant 142 (out of a total of 295) against Sri Lanka - featuring the switch-hit for six over cover off Murali :: His 134 (out of a second innings total of 282) which would have set up a Lord's win over India in 2007 if the weather hadn't intervened :: His 202 not out in 474-8 dec. (no one else made more than 71) which put England in charge of last year's Lord's Test against India :: His incredible 151 (at a strike rate of 91) in Colombo in March which was the decisive factor in England avoiding the embarrassment of five Test defeats in a row in the winter There are plenty more important Pietersen innings which I won't mention, as four examples should be enough. Time and again, Pietersen has delivered for England. And it's not just the volume of runs that Pietersen has scored for England, but the manner of them. Apart from Botham and possibly Flintoff on a very good day, which other England batsman of recent vintage would have batted like KP did at Headingley? Incidentally, please tell me how the hell you can dismiss an Ashes innings of 227 as "one double ton in a declared innings"!!! |