Pietersen England career over
- Thread starter Mersey86
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
I'm not sure I agree. Pietersen's individual ability is undeniable, but so is his record of terminally antagonising others in his own camp. It is a team game after all.
In the 70s they managed to keep a team together that had difficult loners like Boycott, Emlyn Hughes-type 'characters' like Grieg, nuts like Knott and Randall, eccentrics like Underwood, etc etc. Since then the blazers have constantly resented any individuality, be it a glorious player like Gower or the least worst spin bowler of his time Tufnell. It's like they're regressing back to Gentlemen v Players. Ever since Gooch decided jogging nonstop was the answer to Ashes-winning ruthlessness (that went well), more energy has been wasted removing 'difficult' players than it has in bringing in the top talents. The Australians are always composed of several players who can't stand each other off the pitch but they have the good sense to care more about winning than getting on during the tea break. We're run by a bunch of dullards.
Winning papers over the cracks as it has with Clarke and Watson. See how the furore over their mutual loathing has faded away since the Aussies dropped Buchanan and started winning again.
Anyway there must be more to this than we know about, you would have to be an idiot to ditch your best batsmen ( even if he is past his best ) without a very good reason.
Come on Macca, I that is a bit unfair, perhaps Boycott of all people sums it up ( ironically coming from him! ) with this quote "You can be an individual within the team but you cannot just be an individual. He has said this is how I play take it or leave it, well they've taken it for long enough and now they've said thank you very much, we will leave it."
Personally I think he should of gone after textgate and he would have had novone to blame but himself. Mavericks should be accommodated but a debilitating force should not.
I couldn't care less about personalities being 'difficult', I really couldn't. I find Pietersen thoroughly unlikeable as a character but he's one of the few English players who is capable of world class performances. That's what matters. So long as they perform that's all that matters. It's pretty rich for them to find debilitating the major player who has been likely to save their arses in many Tests. It's a cosy boys club. Most of them hated Flintoff but luckily for them injury finished him before they needed to. Cook is a shit captain and hasn't been anywhere near as good a batsman as he can be for quite a while, yet he's still in his job. He's clubbable, that's why. They'd rather lose but all have a beer together after. Managers are there to manage talents, not turf talents out. (And for Boycott of all people to argue the opposite is laughable. I've always liked him but, christ, this is the man who buggered off to the golf course during a test! If he thinks he deserved to stay in the fold, and he did, then he should change his tack now.)
Completely agree but if someone is affecting the performance of their team mates then there is a problem that needs addressing. Pietersen hasn't been setting the world alight either ( no need to mention the others were worse! ) if he had 3 tons under his belt during the Ashes I doubt he would have been sacked. As far as your point about managers I think the evidence shows that Pietersen is unmanageable.
Mike Atherton Chief Cricket Correspondent
Published 1 minute ago
Kevin Pietersen’s England career is over. Ultimately, he ran out of allies during the two days in which the final decision was made to cut adrift England’s leading run-scorer across all formats. Even Alastair Cook, the young captain who had taken Pietersen back into the fold after the retirement of Andrew Strauss, now wants to rebuild an England team without him.
The key figures were Paul Downton, the new managing director of England cricket; Ashley Giles, the acting head coach, who flew into London on Monday evening and met Downton on Tuesday; James Whitaker, the national selector, and Cook. They were unanimous in their desire to show Pietersen the door.
Downton had also taken findings from England players after the whitewash in Australia, and there were no voices among the senior players telling him that Pietersen should remain. Pietersen had one or two young acolytes that he surrounded himself with, but the voices that counted were not friendly. Instead they pointed to his behaviour and attitude, considered beyond the pale by team-mates at times in Australia, and demanded that England start afresh with new values — or at least old values that had gone missing.
Amid the thank-yous from both sides — and there was much to be thankful for during Pietersen’s brilliant career — the money quote from Downton was this: “Everyone was aware that there was a need to begin the long-term planning after the Australia tour. Therefore we have decided the time is right to look to the future and start to rebuild not only the team but also team ethic and philosophy.” The implication could not be clearer: that can only happen without Pietersen in the dressing room.
One man who has not been involved over the past two days is Andy Flower. His relationship with Pietersen was always rocky, but it is the way that the batsman’s relationship with Cook has soured over recent months that has had such an influence over the discussions within the past few days. Pietersen has done well to fall out with Cook, the most easy-going and forgiving of sportsmen. Cook was instrumental in Pietersen’s reintegration after the “textgate” row that led to his brief suspension from the team.
For a while, this move looked to be inspired, given Pietersen’s profound influence in helping England to win in India for the first time in more than two decades. But recently, Cook has come to realise that all that glitters out in the middle is not necessarily gold in the dressing room.
In this realisation, he joins a long list: from Mick Newell, at Nottinghamshire, who is thought to be keen on applying for the England job, to Peter Moores, whose international coaching career was brought to a shuddering halt by Pietersen, to Strauss, Flower and now Cook. The common denominator through all the mayhem has been Pietersen.
As his future was being decided, Pietersen was giving a clinic at the Kia Oval to his Surrey team-mates about how to play spin. Despite the occasional weakness against the left-arm variety, there have been few more destructive players of it who have played for England. His Surrey team-mates may be seeing a bit more of it this summer than they might have expected.
Pietersen’s stated ambition of scoring 10,000 Test runs will not come to pass and he will remain free to play a full part in the Indian Premier League. His future will be confined to such tournaments in which he will command a high price as long as the motivation remains to maintain peak condition.
It is to the glitz and glamour of Twenty20 that Pietersen will now look to thrill.
For his part, Pietersen said of his international career with England: “Playing cricket for my country has been an honour. Every time I pulled on the England shirt was a moment of huge pride for me and that is something that will live with me for ever.
“Although I am obviously very sad the incredible journey has come to an end, I’m also hugely proud of what we, as a team, have achieved over the past nine years. I believe I have a great deal still to give as a cricketer. I will continue to play, but deeply regret that it won’t be for England.”
Many supporters will also regret his departure, given that he has been one of the greatest and most entertaining batsmen to have played for England, but that regret does not spread to the dressing room.
The England players have had enough, and are not prepared to allow more Pietersen-related chaos to infect the team.
So ends one of the most remarkable careers of recent times, one that has been studded with brilliance and controversy in near-equal measure.
Published 1 minute ago
Kevin Pietersen’s England career is over. Ultimately, he ran out of allies during the two days in which the final decision was made to cut adrift England’s leading run-scorer across all formats. Even Alastair Cook, the young captain who had taken Pietersen back into the fold after the retirement of Andrew Strauss, now wants to rebuild an England team without him.
The key figures were Paul Downton, the new managing director of England cricket; Ashley Giles, the acting head coach, who flew into London on Monday evening and met Downton on Tuesday; James Whitaker, the national selector, and Cook. They were unanimous in their desire to show Pietersen the door.
Downton had also taken findings from England players after the whitewash in Australia, and there were no voices among the senior players telling him that Pietersen should remain. Pietersen had one or two young acolytes that he surrounded himself with, but the voices that counted were not friendly. Instead they pointed to his behaviour and attitude, considered beyond the pale by team-mates at times in Australia, and demanded that England start afresh with new values — or at least old values that had gone missing.
Amid the thank-yous from both sides — and there was much to be thankful for during Pietersen’s brilliant career — the money quote from Downton was this: “Everyone was aware that there was a need to begin the long-term planning after the Australia tour. Therefore we have decided the time is right to look to the future and start to rebuild not only the team but also team ethic and philosophy.” The implication could not be clearer: that can only happen without Pietersen in the dressing room.
One man who has not been involved over the past two days is Andy Flower. His relationship with Pietersen was always rocky, but it is the way that the batsman’s relationship with Cook has soured over recent months that has had such an influence over the discussions within the past few days. Pietersen has done well to fall out with Cook, the most easy-going and forgiving of sportsmen. Cook was instrumental in Pietersen’s reintegration after the “textgate” row that led to his brief suspension from the team.
For a while, this move looked to be inspired, given Pietersen’s profound influence in helping England to win in India for the first time in more than two decades. But recently, Cook has come to realise that all that glitters out in the middle is not necessarily gold in the dressing room.
In this realisation, he joins a long list: from Mick Newell, at Nottinghamshire, who is thought to be keen on applying for the England job, to Peter Moores, whose international coaching career was brought to a shuddering halt by Pietersen, to Strauss, Flower and now Cook. The common denominator through all the mayhem has been Pietersen.
As his future was being decided, Pietersen was giving a clinic at the Kia Oval to his Surrey team-mates about how to play spin. Despite the occasional weakness against the left-arm variety, there have been few more destructive players of it who have played for England. His Surrey team-mates may be seeing a bit more of it this summer than they might have expected.
Pietersen’s stated ambition of scoring 10,000 Test runs will not come to pass and he will remain free to play a full part in the Indian Premier League. His future will be confined to such tournaments in which he will command a high price as long as the motivation remains to maintain peak condition.
It is to the glitz and glamour of Twenty20 that Pietersen will now look to thrill.
For his part, Pietersen said of his international career with England: “Playing cricket for my country has been an honour. Every time I pulled on the England shirt was a moment of huge pride for me and that is something that will live with me for ever.
“Although I am obviously very sad the incredible journey has come to an end, I’m also hugely proud of what we, as a team, have achieved over the past nine years. I believe I have a great deal still to give as a cricketer. I will continue to play, but deeply regret that it won’t be for England.”
Many supporters will also regret his departure, given that he has been one of the greatest and most entertaining batsmen to have played for England, but that regret does not spread to the dressing room.
The England players have had enough, and are not prepared to allow more Pietersen-related chaos to infect the team.
So ends one of the most remarkable careers of recent times, one that has been studded with brilliance and controversy in near-equal measure.
South Africa giveth, South Africa taketh
Agree with the poor captain bit, however, given the fact that Pietersen owed his rehabilitation back into the team after his quite unforgivable behavior during textgate almost entirely to Cook gives an insight into the mans character if the rumours are true. Everywhere he has been with the possible exception of his IPL team he has left in a pool of acrimony, it was only a matter of time before someone decided enough is enough. He's got want he wants more than anything - his big fat IPL contract reinstated
Yes, but I do think they need to change their ethos rather than protect it. I doubt that Pietersen was any worse than, say, Phil Edmonds, who by all accounts managed to infuriate all ten of his teammates (and once read a newspaper while fielding), but was still tolerated for his bowling. As Michael Vaughan says - and what a pity he's not involved these days - they need to explain precisely why Pietersen was deemed unmanageable, rather than just 'not one of us'.
Do they though? Certainly we'd all like to know, but if they do that publicly they run significant risks. Goodness knows what further trouble that might stir up in the media, not to mention the courts if Pietersen were to be advised that what they had said was defamatory. Leaving aside the unedifying spectacle of officials protecting their respective and collective fundaments, none of that would help the sport overall.
Except it will all be revealed in someone's biography at some stage. The media already have snipets, to end the speculation the ECB could at least elaborate a little on their anodyne statement so that we understand their thinking
Not convinced, I'm afraid. 99% of the time those biogs either appear some time after the sportsmen discussed in them have ended their careers or get vetted by lawyers to remove dangerous content (or both). I doubt the ECB see it as a priority to end speculation when the downside of doing so could be so costly. Nor, IMHO, should they.
Well they are going to have to suck up the criticism as no doubt Pietersen will be ensuring his version of events are put out by his mates in the media. Don't know if Darren Gough is back from The Step yet, but if he is Talkshite may be worth tuning into at 4pm for a change
GK Macca is bang on on this subject. The real crime England management did was letting the likes of Broad and Swann to form a clique.The real bad apple was the one who quit in the middle of a series. I don't care what the circumstances were...I have followed cricket for more than 15 years and I can't remember the last time a player quit in the middle of the series.
Absolutely agree about Swann leaving when he did, but I can't really see the relevance of that to the Pietersen question. Besides, Atherton's article seems to make it pretty clear that disenchantment with Pietersen went far beyond the confines of the boardroom at Lord's.
Look even if Broad / Swann played some provocative part in textgate how can anyone explain away Pietersen's actions as anything other than extremely undermining to team spirit especially under the circumstances in the middle of a test match. He's fallen out with virtually every team he's played in - he's got form, to lay all the blame at the door of the ECB ( who at least have been decisive for a change ) is just plain wrong. Swann may have been protecting his average by retiring - however he says he just couldn't get the revs on the ball any more.
Star players have star ego's you either learn to manage them and that means pandering to their whims then you do that otherwise you become average. England will now move back down the rankings to where we belong, we don't have any star players, we don't have players who can turn games. The great teams have great players with great egos Warne, Waugh, Pointing, Pieterson etc.. we hate them, at times, but we also understand that they need to be in the teams to take them above the ordinary.
Like Pietersen did in Australia this winter, you mean? For all his considerable ability, he has a career-long history of causing serious disruption. He did it at Notts, he did it at Hampshire and Flower is the second England coach whose time in charge has come to a juddering stop with Pietersen and his behaviour high on the list of contributory factors. Even Cook, who was largely responsible for Pietersen being brought back into the fold in the first place, has had enough. There comes a point when management are entitled to decide that the benefits brought to the team by a disruptive star player are not worth the damage he causes. IMO England will come back from this quicker than they would have if Pietersen had been left in place.
Yet he never had this issue when Vaughan was in charge of the team...
I doubt it, what we saw in Oz is the future of England for the next few years. Anderson - on the slide, Pieterson - Gone, Swann - Gone, Trott - Out for a while. Your 2 best bowlers and batsmen going or gone is a big ask to come back from quickly.
I doubt it, what we saw in Oz is the future of England for the next few years. Anderson - on the slide, Pieterson - Gone, Swann - Gone, Trott - Out for a while. Your 2 best bowlers and batsmen going or gone is a big ask to come back from quickly.
It's true about Vaughan, but given Pietersen's overall record you have to say that's the exception which proves the rule. Ditto in county cricket, where Surrey have been happy enough with him to be talking about offering him a new contract, but he left a trail of destroyed working relationships behind him at the other two counties he's played for.
Not saying England will recover quickly BTW (though I wouldn't necessarily rule it out either). What I was and still am saying is that I think they'll do it more quickly without Pietersen than they would have done with him.
Not saying England will recover quickly BTW (though I wouldn't necessarily rule it out either). What I was and still am saying is that I think they'll do it more quickly without Pietersen than they would have done with him.
You can add Natal to the list! He has been sacked 3 times by England now! I think the Piers Morgan - Prior spat gives an incite into the character of Pietersen ( who else would have leaked that info to Morgan ) Prior being instrumental in facilitating Pietersens' rehabilitation into the team after textgate. disgusting behaviour if true to bring someone else into this.
If you watch him batting he is in decline anyway, with a chronic knee condition that will only get worse, several times he was limping around the outfield during the Ashes, the 5 day game won't be helping that. He will be 34 in June and probably has 2 seasons left max if he played test cricket. Its definately time to move on, we have lots of exciting young cricketers in the country lets see who amongst them can make the grade.
That makes good sense, although I'm maybe not as excited about what we have available as Tony.
They are very big shoes to fill there is no doubt about that!
