The Kevin Pietersen Isn't Touring India Thread

[LondonTiger]

First topic message reminder :

it would be good to keep all the talk in one place.

A quick question. Mr Pietersen is now a free agent so can pick and choose where he wants to play. If he had made himself available to tour India, but stated he was not available for the series with NZ in 2013 should he have been picked for the India tour?

[Mike Selig]

The issue wasn't one of being involved in the camp, but without picking him for the India tour that was to happen after the camp

The contract was offered before the Indian tour. It's possible that it came with the caveat "if things go well on the training camp you can stay on for India". My point was that if that's the case and KP still turned it down then it doesn't show any kind of commitment from his part.

He has acted with good sense for looking out for number 1 yes. But his actions don't reflect those of someone wanting to do everything possible to get back into the side. It comes accross as "I'm keen to play, but only on my terms".

As I say, it's one thing apologising to Strauss and saying he's committed to England. I feel the selectors want more than words. So far, they haven't had anything.

[msp83]

But then its not just about KP. Of course he actid out of line, but the ECB and even some of his teammates and the coach who failed to keep them in line as was acknowledged by Flower himself on the Twitter stuff, will have to take their fair share of blaim. As such, I think one can see why Pietersen acted the way he did with regard to that 4 month contract. A contract for 4 months, having to participate in a pretour camp for which you haven't been selected, well, I think common sense is enough to understand KP's position. Remember the squad was to be declared much earlier unlike the camp that is to happen next month.

[guildfordbat]

Looking at the alleged demands of the contract:

- public apology: reasonable, his first one wasn't very public and wasn't much of an apology. Pietersen may feel he's being dragged over the coals time and time again (he hasn't), but really it doesn't take much to say "sorry" (again). Shouldn't have been a problem.

- Waiver on legal action: I'm told these are not uncommon in sporting contracts. I don't know the content of standard central contracts, but I don't think this is as unreasonable as it sounds to us laymen. It looks bad because with this coming out it looks like the ECB are trying to cover themselves.

- Requirement to renege on his broadcasting contract: not good, unless the ECB also offered to compensate the company in KP's place. And pretty unnecessary. I sense Sky interference. Again though, for someone serious about regaining his place is a few thousand for not doing a commentary stint really a valid sticking point?

- Spending time at the training camp: my guess is this was the main problem, KP doesn't strike me as someone who will be a good sparring partner, which is essentially what he was asked to be. But I do think some people are too quick to say "they're adults, it's their job, get over it" - the fact it isn't really just a job, these guys spend a good part of their current lives in each other's company. It's not necessary (or even desirable) for them all to be the best of friends, but they have to be able to trust and respect each-other. I suspect this is the real issue.

In that sense I actually think the suggestion that Pietersen spend time with the squad is a sensible one, and would have thought/hoped it come with the caveat that if things go well then he would be back in the squad immediately. My question is was this the case? Did Pietersen say "I want guarantees that I'll be in the squad however the camp goes"? Or was he told that no matter how it went he wouldn't be allowed to stay on (that would be bad)?

I mean here's the thing: Pietersen says he wants to commit to England in all forms, but when he's given a chance to take a step in that direction he doesn't take it. Sure it required a few things, but ultimately his actions don't seem to be those of someone desperate to get back into international cricket.

And it has to be said the contract offered (with the unnecessary caveats - I maintain that the requirement that he clears the air with the rest of the team is not only reasonable but necessary) doesn't shout that the management desperately want him back either.

I fear this is going to run longer than The Mousetrap! [Younger posters should google Agatha Christie & Longest Running Play. ]

I know a little about waivers on legal action. Comments immediately below are nothing to do with the Pietersen saga and just a very general broad brush.

An employer doesn't want to go to the time, trouble and expense of negotiating a settlement with an employee only to find at apparent conclusion that the employee is taking him to court after all. That's fair enough where the employer is acting reasonably and just wants things neatly put to bed. However, on the other hand, an employee doesn't want to sign away legal rights only to find out later that his employer is acting unreasonably and trying to shaft him.

As often with the legal world - and we seem more in that now than the world of cricket - things are not clear cut. Sometimes a half-way house solution is to refer matters to a named mediator before any legal action is taken. The trouble with that is that it adds to time delays and sometimes the parties can't even agree on who the mediator should be!

As with many hugely talented and wealthy sportsmen, Pietersen appears to surround himself with advisers. On the face of it, that's totally understandable. He concentrates on playing cricket and they do all the boring stuff. However, I do wonder if in this particular situation they are going to add further technical issues to the whole sorry mess with resultant delays. Time spent quibbling over a waiver is time lost sorting out the real issue.

It may not be easy for him but I think Pietersen needs to rein his advisers in, decide what he really wants and go for it himself. If he still feels that things can't be sorted without lawyers, that would suggest to me all trust has broken down and decides matters once and for all.

[Mad for Chelsea]

went to see the Mousetrap in the theatre once! Loved it!!

PS: isn't it annoying when your automatic spell check flags up "theatre"?

[Mike Selig]

The 4-month thing is perfectly reasonable - effectively a probationary period.

Once again, I think the legal thing is a bit of a smokescreen: it is not unusual in sporting contracts, especially for previously troublesome characters, and probably wouldn't stand up to scrutiny in a court of law.

I suspect the main problem was Pietersen didn't want to be contracted for a period of time (which meant he might have had to miss most of the big bash for example) without the guarantee or possibility that he would be playing for England in that time. Whether the possibility was left open or not we don't know.

I'm not saying the ECB have behaved well: in some respects the contract offered was unreasonable (the requirement that he abandon his commentary stint for example, and if it wasn't made clear that the door was open for him to make the India tour, depending on how he behaved at the camp, then that was wrong).

But there was an offer made, and Pietersen refused it. That offer may have been unreasonable, but suggestions that Pietersen has done all he could to get back into the frame have been shown to be false. The correct course of action for Pietersen would have been to accept the contract, then go out and give his absolute all on the camp, whilst behaving impeccably. Had he done that, England would have surely had to select him, and if they hadn't he could have reasonably said he did all he could. But that would have been out of character.

I perfectly understand the reasons why Pietersen refused the contract. Many other players would have done the same. What this has done is shown that previous statements about absolute commitment are just hot air, he remains committed to number 1 above all.

I suspect unfortunately there is quite a bit of one-upmanship involved. The ECB and Pietersen both want reconciliation, but on their terms.

[Hibbz]

Why should a public apology be required? I'm pretty sure none of the texts were about the public who should really only be interested in performances on the pitch which even KP's biggest critic would have to admit don't need to be apologised for.

Besides which I don't remember Swann being asked to publicly apologise for insulting Samosa Patel.

ECB just trying (and failing) to make KP look small. It's the ECB that look small. Small minded.

F@ck you ECB.

[KP_fan]

he showed them a middle finger.......... ECB have been made red-faced publicly.....
and are fearing legal action....
which someone on this board predicted

[guildfordbat]

he showed them a middle finger.......... ECB have been made red-faced publicly.....
and are fearing legal action....
which someone on this board predicted

KP_fan, Are the ECB actually fearing legal action or just trying to sensibly spare themselves the hassle and expense that inevitably goes with any potential legal case? I guess the answer depends on one's stance in this interminable saga.

A serious question. What would Pietersen hope to gain from legal action? As I understand it, his aim to be reinstated in the England Test side. No court in the land will order that or be able to. He might at very best be awarded some financial compensation if any procedural breaches are shown to have been made by the ECB but he hardly needs that and it certainly won't build bridges.

[msp83]

guildford
But the question is, whether those bridges could ever be built? Are both sides interested? If that isn't happening, then Pietersen might go the legal way to get back at the ECB. Could be a bit embarrassing, that is all, but both won't gain anything cricketing from that.

[KP_fan]

he showed them a middle finger.......... ECB have been made red-faced publicly.....
and are fearing legal action....
which someone on this board predicted

KP_fan, Are the ECB actually fearing legal action or just trying to sensibly spare themselves the hassle and expense that inevitably goes with any potential legal case? I guess the answer depends on one's stance in this interminable saga.

A serious question. What would Pietersen hope to gain from legal action? As I understand it, his aim to be reinstated in the England Test side. No court in the land will order that or be able to. He might at very best be awarded some financial compensation if any procedural breaches are shown to have been made by the ECB but he hardly needs that and it certainly won't build bridges.

Have you heard of an adage......cornered cat?
when she has no where to go...she attacks...and that's why cat should not be proverbially cornered.

when he knows they have killed his career...KP has nothing to get out of ECB anymore...no more to lose....he will sue them.....and legally he is standing on solid rock compared to thin ice that ECB is on....we all can see it.
and some in ECB undertsand it......
but the headstrong egoists in ECB haven't figured out......how much is enough....how much can they bend without breaking

[guildfordbat]

guildford
But the question is, whether those bridges could ever be built? Are both sides interested? If that isn't happening, then Pietersen might go the legal way to get back at the ECB. Could be a bit embarrassing, that is all, but both won't gain anything cricketing from that.

That's really why I asked about what Pietersen is attempting to obtain. The further both parties go (or get taken) down the legal route, the less chances there are of bridges being built. Pietersen might just win some compensation and cause some embarrassment for the ECB but that's a long way from what he apparently wanted at outset of this saga.

I can't agree with your other post about Pietersen's legal case ''standing on solid rock''. Not necessarily because you're wrong but because not enough is in the public domain and so it's impossible to form a legal view. Obviously, a cricketing opinion can be made and you've clearly made yours!

[KP_fan]

it is clearly established that ECB have nothing against KP LEGALLY
they tried but didn't get anything from SA-cans......
they tried but didn't get anything from Blackberry.....
they tried hook and crook to get him to a confession that could be used as an evidence and failed.....
their draconian high handedness is INSPITE of a legal evidence....with legal evidence they would have nailed him to the ground by now

[Mike Selig]

Thing is, the ECB don't have to have anything "against KP". There is nothing in his contract which guarantees him a starting place, so the selectors can drop him if they feel like it (obviously they haven't dropped him just because they feel like it, but they could); the selectors are accountable to the ECB, and if they do their job poorly then they get replaced, but I don't see what KP could sue the ECB for here. They haven't terminated his contract, they have merely not renewed it, and again they are perfectly entitled to.

I guess the only thing would be some sort of confidentiality breach over the supposed leaks during the talks - tough to prove where the leaks came from given the media won't reveal, and I'm not sure if leaking details of confidential talks is a sueable thing.

The point is surely that if KP sues the ECB the burden of proof is on him to show that they've done wrong, not the other way round.

Of course any legal action would be embarassing and probably expensive for the ECB. I'm not sure it would do KP's future employment prospects that much good either.

[Mad for Chelsea]

http://www.espncricinfo.com/england/content/current/story/583159.html

I think Cook seems keen to get KP back in the fold, but he does say that some issues haven't been resovled yet (doesn't say what those issues are, quite rightly). The feeling I'm getting from the last couple of weeks is pointing towards a reconciliation, which can surely only be good news.

[KP_fan]

Thing is, the ECB don't have to have anything "against KP". There is nothing in his contract which guarantees him a starting place, so the selectors can drop him if they feel like it (obviously they haven't dropped him just because they feel like it, but they could); the selectors are accountable to the ECB, and if they do their job poorly then they get replaced, but I don't see what KP could sue the ECB for here. They haven't terminated his contract, they have merely not renewed it, and again they are perfectly entitled to.

I guess the only thing would be some sort of confidentiality breach over the supposed leaks during the talks - tough to prove where the leaks came from given the media won't reveal, and I'm not sure if leaking details of confidential talks is a sueable thing.

The point is surely that if KP sues the ECB the burden of proof is on him to show that they've done wrong, not the other way round.

Of course any legal action would be embarassing and probably expensive for the ECB. I'm not sure it would do KP's future employment prospects that much good either.

ECB haven't dropped him .....because they felt like it....and for no reason
BUT they have stated reasons...on record......such as sms first.....and then team-spirit, happy dressing room etc.....

if taken to court......onus is on ECB to PROVE charges ...on the basis of whihc they fired KP

I can see ECB losing in court on following grounds...to KP

1) Causin Damage to Reputation and Livelihood of a professional based on unsubstantiated allegations
2) Professional misconduct and violation of codes of confidentiality by leaking informations in public domain

and once proven guilty of the above...they can be further sued for....

3) Damaging national interests through biass/ favouristism/ incompetence

and will no doubt be proven guilty for the same....

what KP will get out of a legal win...if any other door is not left for him ?

redemption....of being declared clean.....a boost for the ego....a blam for the hurt souls.
and secondarily money...that will runs into 10s of millions

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Thing is, the ECB don't have to have anything "against KP". There is nothing in his contract which guarantees him a starting place, so the selectors can drop him if they feel like it (obviously they haven't dropped him just because they feel like it, but they could); the selectors are accountable to the ECB, and if they do their job poorly then they get replaced, but I don't see what KP could sue the ECB for here. They haven't terminated his contract, they have merely not renewed it, and again they are perfectly entitled to.

I guess the only thing would be some sort of confidentiality breach over the supposed leaks during the talks - tough to prove where the leaks came from given the media won't reveal, and I'm not sure if leaking details of confidential talks is a sueable thing.

The point is surely that if KP sues the ECB the burden of proof is on him to show that they've done wrong, not the other way round.

Of course any legal action would be embarassing and probably expensive for the ECB. I'm not sure it would do KP's future employment prospects that much good either.

ECB haven't dropped him .....because they felt like it....and for no reason
BUT they have stated reasons...on record......such as sms first.....and then team-spirit, happy dressing room etc.....

if taken to court......onus is on ECB to PROVE charges ...on the basis of whihc they fired KP

I can see ECB losing in court on following grounds...to KP

1) Causin Damage to Reputation and Livelihood of a professional based on unsubstantiated allegations
2) Professional misconduct and violation of codes of confidentiality by leaking informations in public domain

and once proven guilty of the above...they can be further sued for....

3) Damaging national interests through biass/ favouristism/ incompetence

and will no doubt be proven guilty for the same....

what KP will get out of a legal win...if any other door is not left for him ?

redemption....of being declared clean.....a boost for the ego....a blam for the hurt souls.
and secondarily money...that will runs into 10s of millions

Never have I read such rubbish in my life

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

How about we all just move on from Pietersen.

Let him make his millions in the IPL and Big Bash, and let England concentrate on bringing through and developing the younger players.

I honestly don't see how bringing him back into the team will be a positive thing now. The media frenzy would be ridiculous, and the cricket wouldn't matter anymore. Just move on already, it's really boring and annoying now.

[chrisss]

How about we all just move on from Pietersen.

Let him make his millions in the IPL and Big Bash, and let England concentrate on bringing through and developing the younger players.

I honestly don't see how bringing him back into the team will be a positive thing now. The media frenzy would be ridiculous, and the cricket wouldn't matter anymore. Just move on already, it's really boring and annoying now.

The positive thing that Pietersen would bring to the team would be lots of runs, and if his runs helped us win the Ashes or the World Cup, the cricket would absolutely matter. The media frenzy wouldn't last long anyway.

[KP_fan]

Thing is, the ECB don't have to have anything "against KP". There is nothing in his contract which guarantees him a starting place, so the selectors can drop him if they feel like it (obviously they haven't dropped him just because they feel like it, but they could); the selectors are accountable to the ECB, and if they do their job poorly then they get replaced, but I don't see what KP could sue the ECB for here. They haven't terminated his contract, they have merely not renewed it, and again they are perfectly entitled to.

I guess the only thing would be some sort of confidentiality breach over the supposed leaks during the talks - tough to prove where the leaks came from given the media won't reveal, and I'm not sure if leaking details of confidential talks is a sueable thing.

The point is surely that if KP sues the ECB the burden of proof is on him to show that they've done wrong, not the other way round.

Of course any legal action would be embarassing and probably expensive for the ECB. I'm not sure it would do KP's future employment prospects that much good either.

ECB haven't dropped him .....because they felt like it....and for no reason
BUT they have stated reasons...on record......such as sms first.....and then team-spirit, happy dressing room etc.....

if taken to court......onus is on ECB to PROVE charges ...on the basis of whihc they fired KP

I can see ECB losing in court on following grounds...to KP

1) Causin Damage to Reputation and Livelihood of a professional based on unsubstantiated allegations
2) Professional misconduct and violation of codes of confidentiality by leaking informations in public domain

and once proven guilty of the above...they can be further sued for....

3) Damaging national interests through biass/ favouristism/ incompetence

and will no doubt be proven guilty for the same....

what KP will get out of a legal win...if any other door is not left for him ?

redemption....of being declared clean.....a boost for the ego....a blam for the hurt souls.
and secondarily money...that will runs into 10s of millions

Never have I read such rubbish in my life

yeah...these are dangerous ideas....best dismissed as rubbish by ECB
for they will scare the seat out of ECB should they read......and will immediately hope KP or his lawyers don't read them.........
but he and his lawyers already know their positions....sitting pretty.....putting their conditions on what he wants before he will return ( such as action against anderson and swann)....and a full equal contract

with millions of dollars of IPL, SLPL, BB, BPL, ESPN commentary deals in hand.....and a 10+ million dollar of settlement bonanza that ECB will have to pay......he ain't losing much

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

So he is going to take the ECB to court on the grounds that they dropped him and didnt give him a new contract? Give me strength

[Mad for Chelsea]

and we were having such a sensible discussion

ah well, all good things come to an end eh...

[KP_fan]

and they are now going to Lanka to negotiate with him a 12 month contrcat.....ha ha.....they are scared of legal implications and are running after him all the way to Lanka....

On a day when fresh details of the frenetic negotiations between Pietersen and the board emerged after weeks of silence, it was also learned that the ECB contacted him yesterday (Tuesday) to open negotiations about a new 12-month central contract. The ECB declined to comment on the matter but the talks are expected to continue while Pietersen is in Sri Lanka where David Collier, the chief executive of the ECB, and Hugh Morris, the managing director of the England team, will also be based during the World Twenty20.

[KP_fan]

So he is going to take the ECB to court on the grounds that they dropped him and didnt give him a new contract? Give me strength

you didn't read the above so let me repost the ground on whihc he will sue them..


1) Causin Damage to Reputation and Livelihood of a professional based on unsubstantiated allegations
2) Professional misconduct and violation of codes of confidentiality by leaking informations in public domain

and look at how ECB presents the picture and what KP is saying and doing.....

ECB:..makes it appear he is crawling on knees and rubbing his nose to come back at any cost
KP...I cannot come back unless action is taking against anderson and swann for twitter stuff

ECB: There are issues so we cannot give him a contract
KP: I was offered a 4 month contract, whihc I rejected
ECB: We are offering you a 12 month contrcat(please don't take legal action)..and coming all the way to Lanka to talk to you

[KP_fan]

and for those who were saying...he should have accepted a 4 month contract..
he didn't.....
and look......he is being offered a 12 month contrcat

[msp83]

Those who think KP has no ground to take the ECB to court should go through this.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/westindies/content/story/582015.html

KPF has a way of a dramatic presentation of his point and drama always comes with a bit of exaggeration, but I think his arguments about the kind of grounds that Pietersen has against the ECB, the first 2 ones, could be quite valid.
Chris Gayle, another high profile player involved in a tussle with the WICB was asked to drop out of a case against the WICB. Gayle didn't agree, perhaps they have reached some kind of understanding on it and they eventually moved on.
Interestingly enough the link above also talks about Lendl Simmons who also won his case against the WICB and he's in the squad at the moment!.

[VTR]

Its all very well people saying lets move on from this, but as long as he isn't playing for England it wont go away. Any loss will be analysed from the angle "what if he was playing" like it or not.

Heard a 5 Live interview with Broad yesterday and I felt sorry for him squirming for an answer when asked about it. You could tell the poor guy was uncomfortable towing the line, but these questions will continue to be asked so it isn't going away and nor can it be ignored.

[VTR]

and we were having such a sensible discussion

ah well, all good things come to an end eh...

Just use the ignore function, that's what I've done and I can't see any illiterate ill-informed ramblings anymore - bliss.

[Mike Selig]

Those who think KP has no ground to take the ECB to court should go through this.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/westindies/content/story/582015.html

KPF has a way of a dramatic presentation of his point and drama always comes with a bit of exaggeration, but I think his arguments about the kind of grounds that Pietersen has against the ECB, the first 2 ones, could be quite valid.
Chris Gayle, another high profile player involved in a tussle with the WICB was asked to drop out of a case against the WICB. Gayle didn't agree, perhaps they have reached some kind of understanding on it and they eventually moved on.
Interestingly enough the link above also talks about Lendl Simmons who also won his case against the WICB and he's in the squad at the moment!.

Not really on the unsubstantiated allegations though: all the ECB have said is that they're not happy about the texts (they've never said what they think is in them, it's all been media speculation and KP has said he did send the texts, but hasn't said what's in them), they don't feel Pietersen is committed to England (again, his actions even recently suggest they have a point) and they don't like him breaching his own contract by anouncing things on youtube. Very different from the absolute lies propagated about Sarwan's fitness.

As I said, KP could have a go at the leak angle - it would be difficult, but I imagine settled out of court to prevent embarassment and the inevitable expenses that go with a court case anyway. From his perspective, apart from gaining a bit of money in the short term and embarassing the ECB (both of which would appeal to KP I have no doubt) I don't see what he'd expect to get out of it. I doubt "KP sues the ECB" headlines would provide redemption, he will more likely come accross as petty and revengeful (no doubt his "fans" would still find ways of defending such an action and saying he's always been committed to the England cause) and in the long term will cost KP as nobody will want to employ someone like that.

[Biltong]

Reading through all of this suggests to me that the relation ship between KP and the ECB and team isn't going to be fixed very easily.

I think irrespective of who is wrong in who's eyes, it is a little too late to sort out.

[Mike Selig]

and we were having such a sensible discussion

ah well, all good things come to an end eh...

Just use the ignore function, that's what I've done and I can't see any illiterate ill-informed ramblings anymore - bliss.

It's a shame though, because away from Pietersen and England in general (the comments on Panesar being a more attacking bowler than Swann were particularly hilarious) he/she/it can contribute some reasonable stuff (e.g. on the Yuvraj thread).

Unfortunately the ramblings on those topics have rather ruined things for me.

[Mike Selig]

Reading through all of this suggests to me that the relation ship between KP and the ECB and team isn't going to be fixed very easily.

I think irrespective of who is wrong in who's eyes, it is a little too late to sort out.

Not my impression at all at the moment. Noises from Cook and Pietersen's most recent tweet suggests time is needed, and issues still need to be sorted.

[Biltong]

Reading through all of this suggests to me that the relation ship between KP and the ECB and team isn't going to be fixed very easily.

I think irrespective of who is wrong in who's eyes, it is a little too late to sort out.

Not my impression at all at the moment. Noises from Cook and Pietersen's most recent tweet suggests time is needed, and issues still need to be sorted.

Yet, don't you think the antagonism will only become more of a wedge the longer this takes?

[KP_fan]

Reading through all of this suggests to me that the relation ship between KP and the ECB and team isn't going to be fixed very easily.

I think irrespective of who is wrong in who's eyes, it is a little too late to sort out.

that is exactly what I also think is the case now.......

it's beyond fixing.....for KP won't take anything less than a contractual comittment throuhg the 2015 world cup.

and ECB...with their public denouncement of KP.....and yet backpedalling appeasement, to avoid being sued , in private starting with 4 months and then ofering 12 months...are already being seen as weak.

This is not a battle for Real Cause....but only a battle of egos.....started with KP's I am greater than anyone annoucements at Headingley...

Followed by Flower / ECB's We'll crush you and rub your nose to the ground at any cost

and should they go so far as giving him a contrcat until 2015......KP...his media machine and supporters will declare him winner and ECB/Flower the embarrased loser.

ECB would rather pay him 10 million dollars in compensation then lose their face in public.

From KP's point of view...either he will humble ECB publicly in the battle of egos if he wins....or win Millions in compensation if he loses.

Now will there ever be a better definition of a win-win situation

[Fists of Fury]

What are you rambling on about? There is not a chance in hell of a court case ensuing from this. Let it go...

[Guest]

Today it get's even more bizarre.

Cook wants and expects him to be back.

Strauss confirmed he apologised.

2 months left until the first test in India.

So why in the blue hell is KP not included in the squad? It is beyond madness.

[Mike Selig]

Reading through all of this suggests to me that the relation ship between KP and the ECB and team isn't going to be fixed very easily.

I think irrespective of who is wrong in who's eyes, it is a little too late to sort out.

Not my impression at all at the moment. Noises from Cook and Pietersen's most recent tweet suggests time is needed, and issues still need to be sorted.

Yet, don't you think the antagonism will only become more of a wedge the longer this takes?

Not necessarily. Time can also help heal. There have been noises that it's still a bit raw. I think some people in the dressing-room felt really badly betrayed over what Pietersen did, and I know Pietersen felt badly betrayed by the ECB over a few things (the lightness with which they treated his concerns over overcrowding of the schedule, the non-concern of the twitter account). When emotions are running so high, sometimes to take a step back and say "let's take our time over this" can be a good thing. It allows you to look back more objectively, and with a more critical mind.

It may also, and this is probably a forlorn hope, bring the matter away from the media spotlight somewhat, which will also help.

[Fists of Fury]

Stupid that they named the squad so early, though I can see why they want to give things more time to heal. Regardless, if Cook wants him back (which it is clear he does) then he should be on that plane.

I suppose the only slight chance of him playing out there is if England were to call him up when Bell goes back for the birth of his child. Not a bad replacement, however unlikely!

[Guest]

It seems a lot of positives have been said today. Why allow such a long time for ill feeling to crop up. I know some will say if he is committed he can wait, but really he is missing the T20 World Cup. I think that is more than enough of a price to pay for his misdemeanours.

[Duty281]

Thing is, the ECB don't have to have anything "against KP". There is nothing in his contract which guarantees him a starting place, so the selectors can drop him if they feel like it (obviously they haven't dropped him just because they feel like it, but they could); the selectors are accountable to the ECB, and if they do their job poorly then they get replaced, but I don't see what KP could sue the ECB for here. They haven't terminated his contract, they have merely not renewed it, and again they are perfectly entitled to.

I guess the only thing would be some sort of confidentiality breach over the supposed leaks during the talks - tough to prove where the leaks came from given the media won't reveal, and I'm not sure if leaking details of confidential talks is a sueable thing.

The point is surely that if KP sues the ECB the burden of proof is on him to show that they've done wrong, not the other way round.

Of course any legal action would be embarassing and probably expensive for the ECB. I'm not sure it would do KP's future employment prospects that much good either.

ECB haven't dropped him .....because they felt like it....and for no reason
BUT they have stated reasons...on record......such as sms first.....and then team-spirit, happy dressing room etc.....

if taken to court......onus is on ECB to PROVE charges ...on the basis of whihc they fired KP

I can see ECB losing in court on following grounds...to KP

1) Causin Damage to Reputation and Livelihood of a professional based on unsubstantiated allegations
2) Professional misconduct and violation of codes of confidentiality by leaking informations in public domain

and once proven guilty of the above...they can be further sued for....

3) Damaging national interests through biass/ favouristism/ incompetence

and will no doubt be proven guilty for the same....

what KP will get out of a legal win...if any other door is not left for him ?

redemption....of being declared clean.....a boost for the ego....a blam for the hurt souls.
and secondarily money...that will runs into 10s of millions

What on earth are you talking about KPfan? There is no way that KP could successfully sue the ECB.

[Mike Selig]

To be fair they delayed the anouncement of the squad for a bit didn't they?

The reason he isn't back is that they haven't sorted out the issues yet. Cook said so as well.

I guarantee that if Cook felt strongly that Pietersen should go to India, Pietersen would have gone to India. I suspect Cook would have liked Pietersen, but acknowledged that things hadn't been fully sorted yet.

[guildfordbat]

Reading through all of this suggests to me that the relation ship between KP and the ECB and team isn't going to be fixed very easily.

I think irrespective of who is wrong in who's eyes, it is a little too late to sort out.

Biltong - that's exactly the point I was trying to make in a couple of posts last night. Leaving aside all rights and wrongs, going down the legal route - or even seriously considering it - is going to be more harmful to the relationship and probably result in it being irreparable.

That's why it is so important that Pietersen decides now what is of the utmost importance to him. If it is to try and cause some embarrassment to the ECB and win some damages in court, by all means pursue legal avenues (although I haven't seen anything to convince me that he would necessarily be successful). If it is to get back in the England side, he needs to think again and quickly.

[Mike Selig]

It seems a lot of positives have been said today. Why allow such a long time for ill feeling to crop up. I know some will say if he is committed he can wait, but really he is missing the T20 World Cup. I think that is more than enough of a price to pay for his misdemeanours.

Let's not mix up apples and oranges. He's missing the T20 because he retired from T20s, youtube videos notwithstanding.

Allowing a long time is not a question of allowing more ill-feeling, but allowing temperatures to cool.

And gives Pietersen a chance to SHOW (rather than say, which he can do until he's blue in the face for all I care) that he's committed. So far, he hasn't (refusing the contract). He has another chance, by keeping his schedule clear for the tour of New Zealand. Let's see what he does.

[KP_fan]

What on earth are you talking about KPfan? There is no way that KP could successfully sue the ECB.

I don't think ECB's legal advisors would share your confident optimism.

ECB is trying to get him to sign a " I will not sue you indeminity clause"....by offering him a contrcat....when they said they will no because there are pending issues.

and when he rejects.....they offer him ann anotehr 12months contrcat......implies they are worried and somehow want a sign-off on an indemnity from legal action from KP

I doubt he will sign anything less than 2015 validity contrcat

[Biltong]

Reading through all of this suggests to me that the relation ship between KP and the ECB and team isn't going to be fixed very easily.

I think irrespective of who is wrong in who's eyes, it is a little too late to sort out.

Not my impression at all at the moment. Noises from Cook and Pietersen's most recent tweet suggests time is needed, and issues still need to be sorted.

Yet, don't you think the antagonism will only become more of a wedge the longer this takes?

Not necessarily. Time can also help heal. There have been noises that it's still a bit raw. I think some people in the dressing-room felt really badly betrayed over what Pietersen did, and I know Pietersen felt badly betrayed by the ECB over a few things (the lightness with which they treated his concerns over overcrowding of the schedule, the non-concern of the twitter account). When emotions are running so high, sometimes to take a step back and say "let's take our time over this" can be a good thing. It allows you to look back more objectively, and with a more critical mind.

It may also, and this is probably a forlorn hope, bring the matter away from the media spotlight somewhat, which will also help.

Mike, if his personality has any of the usual SA charateristics then he might be too proud and too hardass to accept this.

[Duty281]

What on earth are you talking about KPfan? There is no way that KP could successfully sue the ECB.

I don't think ECB's legal advisors would share your confident optimism.

ECB is trying to get him to sign a " I will not sue you indeminity clause"....by offering him a contrcat....when they said they will no because there are pending issues.

and when he rejects.....they offer him ann anotehr 12months contrcat......implies they are worried and somehow want a sign-off on an indemnity from legal action from KP

I doubt he will sign anything less than 2015 validity contrcat

KP will probably never play for England again. And if he sues the ECB, the last flicker of hope dies for KP. Will he be on the plane to NZ? I hope not.

[KP_fan]

And gives Pietersen a chance to SHOW (rather than say, which he can do until he's blue in the face for all I care) that he's committed. So far, he hasn't (refusing the contract). He has another chance, by keeping his schedule clear for the tour of New Zealand. Let's see what he does.

Your really think KP cares for England....or ECB/ Flower care for KP..

Both parties are talking the poltically n morally correct talk but soleyl aim to win the battle of egos
To KP...he is bigger than anyone or anything else...
to ECB....their nose is bigger than the game and interest of team

[KP_fan]

What on earth are you talking about KPfan? There is no way that KP could successfully sue the ECB.

I don't think ECB's legal advisors would share your confident optimism.

ECB is trying to get him to sign a " I will not sue you indeminity clause"....by offering him a contrcat....when they said they will no because there are pending issues.

and when he rejects.....they offer him ann anotehr 12months contrcat......implies they are worried and somehow want a sign-off on an indemnity from legal action from KP

I doubt he will sign anything less than 2015 validity contrcat

KP will probably never play for England again. And if he sues the ECB, the last flicker of hope dies for KP. Will he be on the plane to NZ? I hope not.

That is GIVEN....KP won't play for Eng...unless ECB concede defeat to him in public and offer a contrcat until 2015 w'cup.......whihc they are unlikely to

Your really think KP cares for England....or ECB/ Flower care for KP..

Both parties are talking the poltically n morally correct talk but soleyl aim to win the battle of egos
To KP...he is bigger than anyone or anything else...
to ECB....their nose is bigger than the game and interest of team

[Fists of Fury]

What on earth are you talking about KPfan? There is no way that KP could successfully sue the ECB.

I don't think ECB's legal advisors would share your confident optimism.

ECB is trying to get him to sign a " I will not sue you indeminity clause"....by offering him a contrcat....when they said they will no because there are pending issues.

and when he rejects.....they offer him ann anotehr 12months contrcat......implies they are worried and somehow want a sign-off on an indemnity from legal action from KP

I doubt he will sign anything less than 2015 validity contrcat

KP will probably never play for England again. And if he sues the ECB, the last flicker of hope dies for KP. Will he be on the plane to NZ? I hope not.

He will play for England again. I would be prepared to bet that, after a 4-0 drubbing in India, KP will be on that plane to NZ.

[msp83]

One thing I can't understand It was about Strauss that Pietersen send those SMSs. He has apologized to Strauss in person. It was with the ECB that he had problems regarding scheduling and stuff and it was he who had problems with some teammates being involved in some ways with the parity twitter account. Then who the hell in that change room has a valid and good enough reason to feel so bad to the extend they are blocking England's best batsman playing in a very challing tour?

[Mike Selig]

One thing I can't understand It was about Strauss that Pietersen send those SMSs. He has apologized to Strauss in person. It was with the ECB that he had problems regarding scheduling and stuff and it was he who had problems with some teammates being involved in some ways with the parity twitter account. Then who the hell in that change room has a valid and good enough reason to feel so bad to the extend they are blocking England's best batsman playing in a very challing tour?

You think that Strauss was the only one who felt insulted by the fact KP sent text messages to the opposition during a test match?

As has been made quite clear from the start, this issue goes beyond the SMSs, it became a matter of trust and respect within the team.

[Sponsored content]