Cricket
Listening to him on the Big Bash is painful.
Can just imagine Gilchrist and Ponting off air echoing the sentiments of Strauss.
.Great drama alright
Semms a bit far fetched and I wonder if some of this is rehearsed to maintain interest.
a c*nt. no.
he may be petulant, conceited and selfish and have a poor sense of humour, but he's not a c*nt. i detect no malice; the same can not be said for a man whose parting shot was have someone sacked without reason and manipulate a weak and impressionable managing director into doing so.
and as for his being miked up, this format of the game is first and foremost about entertainment and for god's sakes, he's been asked to do it.
The game is about entertainment I agree - and every other player who has agreed to be miked up has come across really well without getting involved in an ongoing argument about cricketing ethics.
He spoke clearly and eloquently when about to face Pattinson bowling 90mph. He put together a sensible innings with one of the most incredible shots you'll ever see: a switch hit over cover for 6... at the G!!!
He riled Gilly and Ponting and put them in their place. He made fun of Canberra which was funny. He's box office.
The irony of the Aussies calling him the Big Ego is comedy gold. England needed ego for, oh, about 20 years or so. Since Botham.
Along comes KP whose big ego helps to defeat Australia!!
Not sure about putting Ponting in his place, Gilchrist maybe.
Personally I don't agree with miking up batsmen - fielders no problem and I think some of the chat with the captains and bowlers has been quite interesting. If a batsman gets hit 10 seconds after answering another daft question from the com box, there will be hell on.
I wouldn't have done it when I played - but someone muttering "don't get hit, don't get hit" is probably not great viewing anyway!
England play a Prime Minister's XI in Canberra on Wednesday.
After hearing Mike Hussey was out injured, Pietersen said "Jeez, I fancy that", and added when asked if he was available: "I'm always available."
Jan 10, 2015 -- 1:44PM, Injera wrote:
I thought he was entertaining and broke up the inane chatter of the 3, yes 3 'commentators'.He spoke clearly and eloquently when about to face Pattinson bowling 90mph. He put together a sensible innings with one of the most incredible shots you'll ever see: a switch hit over cover for 6... at the G!!!He riled Gilly and Ponting and put them in their place. He made fun of Canberra which was funny. He's box office.The irony of the Aussies calling him the Big Ego is comedy gold. England needed ego for, oh, about 20 years or so. Since Botham.Along comes KP whose big ego helps to defeat Australia!!
I don't remember Australia not selecting him because of his "Big Ego"Was it not the ECB?
The very same personality that played a key role in England's rise to Number 1 in the World.
Hence the irony of their criticism.
not that anyone from england hq will be watching the big bash.
the thing about the egos of Prior, Anderson, Broad and Swann serves as a good reminder about what arrogance actually is: when you confidence and self image are out of kilter with your ability.
The ECB are well versed in "cutting off the nose to spite the face".
Oh and I think KP is porking Faulkner
England can not re-build a team let alone a culture around such a player. The Australian system wouldn't have tolerated a character such as Pietersen even if he was a local, he would have had to tow the line or cool his heels playing in front of 80 people in the Shield. The ECB created the mess, the right thing to do was tidy it up.
And just a thought for all those big bash watchers gullible enough to be taken in by Pietersen's 'hale and hearty' media performances, you like so many others before you have been manipulated! if he hangs around for another ten years you'll change your tune.
The simple fact is he didn't fit in with the clique in the team, who despised him because he was earning the money, and they weren't. At some point, he became captain of the team. Why is that? When he became captain though, he didn't quieten down and play the tight quiet well spoken captain they wanted, he played the arrogant I can take this team to the top attitude. Exactly what England needed, but couldn't handle.
Pietersen is the best batsmen England has seen for a long time, and won't again for a long time to come. With the best, always comes arrogance. England tried to tame that, and it cost them becoming a decent team. They had the players that he could have taken to the top, but they chose against, and chose to blame all their problems on him. They tried to tame him, and dictate a slow boring game out of him, which took away everything he was as a player.
How are you guys going without him? Seriously?
And for the record, he would have easily played for Australia. Australia don't try to tame players. Have a look at Warner. He was a T20 player encouraged to play test cricket. An aggressive, arrogant player who always backed his scoring ability to take games away from the opposition. Australia wouldn't try and tame that, because that is his strength as a player.
KP was Englands scapegoat because he wasn't afraid to say what he thought. The fact that he was right, seems to have been lost on most.
I trust you won't let it come to that.
100% correct shades. BLT, has Warner texted opposition team members and slagged off his captain and told them the best way to get him out ?
If Warner had done that the Aussies would have kicked him out forever - England gave him a second chance and what did he do ? Continued behaving
like the prize tosspot he is - good riddance and if you lot want to swallow the sh1t he has come out with in the BBL good luck to you - I hope you've
found his comments entertaining - he will NEVER play for England again however much he bitches and moans.
certainly flower's dogma, and dogma it was, became unstuck during the home series against south africa. and other things played out in that series as well, which makes you question whether bad behaviour was condoned if it came from Flowers' staunchest allies in the dressing room.
The loss against Pakistan could just about be written off against Ajmal's chucking, but the South Africa series cruelly exposed the limitations of the conservative and attritional approach which had got england to number 1 against unspectacular opponents. I vividly remember watching Broad bowl to Amla and Kallis at the end of day three at the Oval, and for three balls pulling out the extra cover and bowling full. after being hit for two fours the extra cover went straight back in. this was at 400 odd for 2 in a must win match. Yes suddenly the approach of risking boundaries to get wickets finally seemed to merit a gamble. Only for three balls though, after the horse had well and truly bolted.
Likewise the only time england came close to challenging South africa in that series was at Old Trafford and that was predominantly down to Kevin Pietersen batting with a wanton aggression that had he mistimed one early on would have been met no doubt by another stern telling from Gooch. And once again he was asked to bat as "recklessly" again in the 2nd innings to secure england a most unprobable win. All the while, his supposedly close teammates had been leaking bits and bobs to a parody twitter account.
He didn't fit into the side, but the question remains was that exclusively his fault? And certainly let's not credit the ECB with getting rid of him; Flower played Downton with embarrassing ease.
18 Jan 15 12:29
BJT, F.Y.I I'm not particularly parochial about Cricket, I love the game, and I like to have a bet, I stay out of discussions unless I feel strongly about a topic. It would seem that like me you also feel strongly about this topic, and as a mark of my respect I am not going to tear your arguments apart, however if you continue to demean me as a shallow plagiarist I will unleash the full length, width and breadth of my Cricketing knowledge.
I trust you won't let it come to that.
Dude,
Never argue with an idiot. You can't win!
Anyone with an opinion is welcomed here. If you have an argument to make don't waste it, share it. Plenty of people love cricket here and even an opposing opinion is useful.
My own take on KP now is he is just like Tony bLiar's weapons of mass destruction. Most of us opposed the war, Knew the weapons of mass destruction were in fact tonka toys but once the troops were in we had to get behind them.
As much as I would have paid to watch KP bat I think he will never play for England again. I truly believe he is now irrelevant. He was always a gun for hire and we were lucky that his ineterests matched Englands for a long time. I think he may be past his best now. We shall see if he has recovered his knee. I think he was a great professional, trained hard and proably set a great example. I also think he may well have been a bit of an a-hole who needed his head flushing down the toilet but that was not my business. Mine was to watch him bat and I did and he is the best I have ever seen bat for England. Better than Gower, Gooch and Boycott. I saw Cowdrey but not in the 60's!
BJT, F.Y.I I'm not particularly parochial about Cricket, I love the game, and I like to have a bet, I stay out of discussions unless I feel strongly about a topic. It would seem that like me you also feel strongly about this topic, and as a mark of my respect I am not going to tear your arguments apart, however if you continue to demean me as a shallow plagiarist I will unleash the full length, width and breadth of my Cricketing knowledge.
I trust you won't let it come to that.
Ooooh **** yeah, now we are talking!
Give it to him shadesy
Jan 18, 2015 -- 1:12PM, Captain Wurzel wrote:
The bravest thing the otherwise gutless ECB have done in years is push Pietersen away from the national side, at his best he was a brilliant hired hand who won tests even series for England, at his worst he was toxic! of late he has delivered only poison. 100% correct shades. BLT, has Warner texted opposition team members and slagged off his captain and told them the best way to get him out ?If Warner had done that the Aussies would have kicked him out forever - England gave him a second chance and what did he do ? Continued behavinglike the prize tosspot he is - good riddance and if you lot want to swallow the sh1t he has come out with in the BBL good luck to you - I hope you've found his comments entertaining - he will NEVER play for England again however much he bitches and moans.
Give me a fcuking break. If he can't handle somebody bowling around the wicket, then why the fcuk was he captain of an international cricket team. Besides that, from my recollection, it was SA that suggested Strauss was carrying on like an idiot, to which he replied LOL. FFS. Seriously?
What a precious bunch of twats that would end somebodies career over that. Well, internationally. He has made 10 times the money outside of England that he would have with them.
Strauss is satisfied he gave no information on how to get him out anyway. All that has been said, is somebody referred to him as an idiot, and KP didn't defend him.
And?
What a trouble making **** he is.
The reality of high profiled sport, is that players need to be managed. They are on super pay packets, idolised by millions, and if England failed him in their ability to promote him as a player they deemed fit for international cricket, then that it is on them. But then, they didn't did they. THEY MADE HIM CAPTAIN.
Jan 18, 2015 -- 12:29PM, shadesof62 wrote:
BJT, F.Y.I I'm not particularly parochial about Cricket, I love the game, and I like to have a bet, I stay out of discussions unless I feel strongly about a topic. It would seem that like me you also feel strongly about this topic, and as a mark of my respect I am not going to tear your arguments apart, however if you continue to demean me as a shallow plagiarist I will unleash the full length, width and breadth of my Cricketing knowledge. I trust you won't let it come to that.
Go to town. Tear my arguments to shreds all you like. Although I feel that if you had anything, you may have slipped a clue in somewhere rather than simply dismiss anything without relevance, as per the usual theme of this forum.
Let's see all the quotes of all the toxicity.
The whole, KP was toxic to the team environment, just doesn't cut it. If that was the case, they would have flourished without him. They are now at their lowest point in probably decades, and their best ever batsmen, is cleaning up in all the T20 tournaments around the world, playing zero international cricket. For all the toxic remarks about him and dragging teams down, there is no shortage of people lining up ready to have him play for them.
KP was the problem for the England cricket team. He was the reason they were failing on the field. Well he is long gone. So now what is the problem? Or should I say who is the problem?
He is Englands best batter leading all time run scorer who would have made 1000s more international runs.
What other country would leave its best player out because he upset a few. Time for the ECB to grow a pair admit they were wrong and get him doing what hes done for 9 years, win cricket matches for England
just ain't worth it unless he's delivering big time. Even in 20/20 he was sh1te for Delhi in the last IPL - he's found a bit
of form against the pie chuckers of the BBL on wickets that suit him. Anyway it doesn't matter, he's out and he's not coming back
- good luck to him selling his wares on the T20 circuit and his whingeing and moaning about his ' bad treatment '.
And the Pietersen and Warner parallel..........how, why?! one guy is a hand on the heart, mad for the battle patriot, the other guy just got the tattoo.
Warner is a problem child but the ACB will massage and manipulate him into the template, because he will pay them back. The ECB indulged Pietersen for years, and in the end paid dearly for it.
A simple question!.... How does the best batsman in a successful National team, become so loathed by his peers?
If your answer is, 'Grahame Swann or James Anderson did it', I want you to go back to your desk and try a little harder.
If your answer is, 'it was the 'system' that did it, or the freemasons' or some other homespun conspiracy theory, stand in the corner with your hands on your head.
If your answer is, 'but all the young impressionable Cricketers seem to like him' report to the History master.
In my view Pietersen was too complicated an individual to fit long term into any pressurised team enviroment, it was always going to end in tears. The Cricket loving public should be grateful that England were fickle enough to select him in the first place, and that we got to view his talents on the world stage.
And a word for some of you Pietersen apologists who have been dining out for years on the ECB's expedience, qualifying and selecting Saffer's as easy and natural as minting a coin. I find it a little disingenuous that you should now be crying into your beards over his demise........take a long hard look in the mirror you.
........take a long hard look in the mirror you scumbags.
i struggle with the statement that he was loathed by his peers. he was fine under fletcher and vaughan. and i'm sure that there are many in that team who regarded him as a egotistical knob, and he is one, but loathed, no. The loathing only came under Flower's dressing room. And in particular it came from those who towed Flower's line the hardest.
he didn't fit in because he didn't agree with Flower's and Gooch's limited dogma and I suspect he wasn't afraid to let people know, not least Flower. Everything about the latter stages of Flower's reign points to groupthink and rabid aversion to cognitive dissonance. valid criticism from the media was barely tolerated, largely ignored. one can only imagine what it must have been like behind closed doors. Flower's idea of dressing room harmony was no doubt everyone agreeing with him and doing what he said.
i've said it before, the worst thing about KP's book (along with the fact that he is a massive bellend) is that the petty and puerile settling of scores has completely undermined what are clearly very legitimate grievances about Flower's time in charge, particularly the second half.
it's more that I don't think he's been treated fairly, and that i think Flower has a massive charge sheet to answer but has somehow managed the sort of Ascension reserved for Messiahs and North Korean dictators.
This has articulated my thoughts exactly (but more eloquently) about KP's book.
I never wanted players who aren't British to represent England. I'm not happy that Ireland's rise has been scuppered by our theft of Morgan and Rankin. It's ludicrous and embarrassing.
The KP thing is more about the utter shambles of his sacking, the mob mentality of Downton and his cronies to blame all on one player and the complete lack of managerial responsibility for their failings to err, manage.
What a shame KP'S book didn't talk more about the mishandling of Monty, Tremlett and Rankin and the ludicrous selection Kerrigan and Woakes at the Oval last year, for example.
KP does not warrant a place in England's Test side imo, he SHOULD have gone to Bangladesh for the T20 WC and he would get in the ODI side ahead of Ravi (you don't need 7 bowlers..)
Jan 20, 2015 -- 10:54AM, shadesof62 wrote:
As far as I can see nobody has said that KP was England's only problem, but clearly he was one of the problems. The reason they are not winning games is because they are not good enough, as for Pietersen strengthening the England side; his best days are a long way behind him, he looks good in the BBL.......but so does Craig Simmons and Simmons can catch. And the Pietersen and Warner parallel..........how, why?! one guy is a hand on the heart, mad for the battle patriot, the other guy just got the tattoo.Warner is a problem child but the ACB will massage and manipulate him into the template, because he will pay them back. The ECB indulged Pietersen for years, and in the end paid dearly for it. A simple question!.... How does the best batsman in a successful National team, become so loathed by his peers? If your answer is, 'Grahame Swann or James Anderson did it', I want you to go back to your desk and try a little harder. If your answer is, 'it was the 'system' that did it, or the freemasons' or some other homespun conspiracy theory, stand in the corner with your hands on your head.If your answer is, 'but all the young impressionable Cricketers seem to like him' report to the History master.In my view Pietersen was too complicated an individual to fit long term into any pressurised team enviroment, it was always going to end in tears. The Cricket loving public should be grateful that England were fickle enough to select him in the first place, and that we got to view his talents on the world stage. And a word for some of you Pietersen apologists who have been dining out for years on the ECB's expedience, qualifying and selecting Saffer's as easy and natural as minting a coin. I find it a little disingenuous that you should now be crying into your beards over his demise........take a long hard look in the mirror you.
Because he was making the big bucks and he was prepared to stand up for what he believed, and they were not. Quite simple really isn't it?
As for his form, he was chastised by his coach whenever they failed and he went out on an aggressive shot. He was taught that to play in the England team, he must not play his natural game, which of course got him selected in the first place.
To put it simply, they caged a lion and poked and prodded him constantly. What the fcuk did they expect would happen? He would thrive?
Seriously, if you read the ECB Dossier, and came out with any other opinion than the ECB are a bunch of precious twats, then I am not sure which one you read.
It riled the team and management that KP allowed Piers Morgan to belittle Alistair Cook and the team on social media. When asked to get Piers Morgan to stop tweeting about the team, KP laughed at the players and told them to get a thicker skin.
rotflmfao.
What a prcik that KP was.....
ffs
obviously some of the other ones in the dossier are just as comical, but that one says a lot.
there's a very strong sentiment amongst many of the online blogs that the established cricket journalists are far too cozy with the ECB and their spineless lack of criticism and towing of the ECB line, of Cook's captaincy and of Flower's approach have been entirely lacking in journalistic rigour and enquiry.
indeed it was no doubt Morgan's tweeting that led to to the phrase "those outside cricket" as though somehow, if you weren't part of the inner circle of journalists, being spoonfed the correct message, your opinion was irrelevant. and of course one could discount everything Warne was saying because it lacked objectivity. ooh the irony.
except it wasn't was it. clearly everything morgan and warne were saying did get through, and the players and in particular i suspect Flower, didn't like and didn't want to hear it.
now of course those opinions almost certainly echoed some of those KP expressed, and such was the Stalinesque paranoia taking over Flower, the inference was that Morgan and Warne, rather than being loud mouthed opinionated media personalities, were in fact dark agents operating exclusively at the behest of Pietersen.
if there had ever been one item to have left off that Dossier, you couldn't have picked a better one, quite simply because it reflects appallingly on everyone but KP.
Note: AF did not speak to KP during the Sydney Test (or for the rest of
the Tour).
This one is a classic, and wouldn't stand up as fact in any court in the world, or in a debate between 2 5 year olds.
In team meetings during the tour, KP would often be
deliberately disengaged (e.g. looking out of the window,
looking at his watch etc whilst AF and others were talking to
the team).
The whole thing reads like some pathetic petty divorce document.
I am generally suprised there is nothing saying, KP blocked me on Facebook.
Strong management and leadership is needed at times and those in authority cannot accept every charge levied against them but at the the same time there must be someone in authority to say to The Emperor you haven't got any clothes on.
