Flower vs KP - Are the Battle Lines being drawn?

First topic message reminder :

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/jan/07/andy-flower-england-team-director-kevin-pietersen

Interesting article on the Guardian suggesting that Andy Flower’s decision to either stay on as England director of cricket may rest on whether Kevin Pietersen remains part of the England set up. According to the article Flower has become increasingly exasperated with both Pietersen’s cavalier attitude to batting and the effect his ego has on the dressing room, with the root of the issues dating back to the infamous texts he sent to the South African players.

I really do not know what to make of this, think in any sport or team no player can be bigger than the team and the same should apply to KP. I can also have some sympathy with his views on KP’s batting, I have often thought that I struggle to think of a player of comparable talent who gets out in quite so many stupid ways. It also seems somewhat clear that KP has an ego to match his prodigious talent.

However whilst all this may be true as someone posted on another thread is the job of management not to manage egos and different personalities and get the best of them. Would have to think at the top levels of sport egos and over inflated opinions of one’s own worth are not exactly unusual traits to encounter. Also from a purely cricketing perspective whilst Pietersen may have many faults he is a box office player, perhaps the only English batsman we have capable of gluing you to your seat as a viewer or turning a game round single handedly in the space of a session. Surely there has to be a place for such a player in the team?

Where do we stand on this? Is Flower as the overall gaffer right to make such a stance and demand, can KP be forgiven for arguably seeing off two head coaches? Is he getting to an age where his contributions to the team do not justify the baggage that is seemingly part and parcel. Would be an ignominious end to a fine career but could Pietersen’s days as an England player be coming to an end?

guildfordbat wrote:

Mike Selig wrote:I have long given up trying to engage KPF on matters concerning England in general (by the way, anything to say about the medium-pace trundler Broad's performance on this tour?) and KP and Flower in particular. It is a shame, because he makes good sense on other topics, and occasionally makes good points even with re to the above, but they are lost in amongst the nonsense and the assumption that the world is black and white.

I suggest again for the peace of these boards that other sensible posters do likewise and don't feed the WUM. It is very tiresome.

I think guildford makes a series of excellent post in his salvo above. I am however a bit concerned about

* As a strong supporter of the county game and as for determining what is best for England going forward, I would welcome Pietersen and all players in contention for Test selection playing as much CC cricket in the opening weeks of the 2014 season as possible. However, following up on a point from Mike, how reasonable would it be for Flower to insist upon that if players already have IPL contractual obligations (which I suspect is the case for Pietersen)? If Flower insisted upon that in those (IPL) circumstances, I feel it would be interpreted as him looking for an excuse to ditch Pietersen rather than genuinely seeking a show of commitment.

I am fairly sure nobody as yet has contractual obligations towards this IPL. If they did then of course it would be unreasonable for Flower and the ECB to demand that the renege on their contracts (unless they offer financial compensation and buy out the contract). On the other hand, I don't think it at all unreasonable to ask that those who wish to be considered for selection for the first test (which I believe comes unusually late in the season in June) play all first class matches for their counties from say may onwards (they would still get to play the bulk of the IPL, and only return when they would be expected to return for the usual may tests).

In fact I would say they could even be stricter than that (I would have sympathy with an England management insisting that players play the entirety of the county season) - but accept that I am old-fashioned in my belief that to play for your country should require significant investment, including giving up on potentially lucrative deals in case of a clash (it is not as if the England cricketers are hard off; the situation is a bit different for some others, e.g. from Sri Lanka or West Indies).

Mike - it seems pretty clear I was mistaken here. I had expected a prize attraction like Pietersen to have already been signed up for this year's IPL. Nothing to do with this 'Pietersen thread' but why shouldn't IPL ducks already be in a row now, at least for those players the teams definitely want and are prepared to pay through the nose for?

Yes, you are right - certainly going by recent years - that the first test this summer is unusually late, not being played until 16th June.

As you would certainly expect, I have no issue with old-fashioned cricketing beliefs.  

PS Have to agree with you on KPF. A shame though as there's knowledge and the odd good point waiting to be found there.

Im pretty sure I read that IPL contracts have not yet been signed but that they are looking to tie people up for the whole tournament and ask for 3 year commitments. Of course negotiations with agents and sounding out would already be underway.
KP has made it quite clear he wants to be part of the England set up, but is he caveating that with " so long as I can play IPL, thats the whole reason I quit ODIs"
Theres more to this than just Flower not liking him because he wouldnt share the jelly beans with Prior.

guildfordbat wrote:

msp83 wrote:If anything, Pietersen was trying to graft his way into some kind of form in a majority of innings he played in the series. He was trying hard to do that he ended up not playing his natural game and thus became less productive. People want him to bat like Boycott and when he does that, they say he ruined the momentum of the innings and ended up handing the initiative to the bowlers.
KP is so right, its difficult being Kevin Pietersen!.

Msp - your point above about Pietersen 'not playing his natural game' is very similar to the addition I made in my last post above. As you might say   , I look forward to your considered responses to my earlier questions and comments, some of which might surprise you in veering towards some appreciation of the maverick batsman.

Guildford, I'd read your earlier excellent post. As you and I agree and the entire world know, Kevin Pietersen has a big ego. In my view, it is this ego that made him so confident in his abilities and made him the player that he is. Good management should be able to manage and appropriate that ego to the side's advantage. Shane Warne could do it at the county level, Michael Vaughan managed it very successfully when he was England skipper. Vaughan in fact had to contend with not only KP, but Fredye Flintoff as well. Fredye, though one of my alltime favorites that he is, had more transgressions that could set a very adverse marker for upcoming youngsters, (not forgetting his inspirational abilities for one moment) He was rather casual in his attitude to fitness regimes, loved his drink and even turned up drunk for net sessions when he was captain, and took the likes of Ian Bell under his wing right away. But in comparison to that, KP's transgressions are minor. In the KP-Moores debacle, I'd blame the ECB more than anyone else the way they leaked things out to the press making KP's continuation as captain rather untenable. KP's texts to the South Africans was a major blip though the contents of them were never made public. I'd say Fredye's Pedalo escapade in the middle of a World Cup could be right up there, particularly in the backdrop of what had happened 4 months earlier. But unlike Flintoff or even Ian Botham in the earlier era, Pietersen tends to get a lot more stick from the authorities and supporters. Perhaps his South African background has something to do with it? Read David Gower's autobiography recently, Gower seems to think Alan Lamb, another player with a South African background got a rather rough deal from the authorities, and I am sure you haven't forgotten the unfortunately stuck HoF debates and the final couple of pages.......

msp83 wrote:

... and I am sure you haven't forgotten the unfortunately stuck HoF debates and the final couple of pages.......

Somewhat unlikely now but if I ever go to war, I want you, msp, in the trench alongside me as I know you'll never give up.   

PS Thanks for the kind comment about the earlier post.

Through the years, KP has been one of England's finest players and one of the few genuine match winners. Even in this shambles of a tour he was still the highest run scorer. I have really enjoyed watching him in full flow.

That said, he does have this track record following him where there is always trouble. It's something that has followed him from every team, club and country and under different captains and management.I guess what I am saying is that the one common factor in all of these issues through the years has been KP.

I don't know him personally so I wont judge his character but it is sad that he seems to be the focal point of a shambles of a tour. It almost seems that the ECB are trying some diversionary tactics away from the tour by focussing on KP and his apparent rift with Flowers.

Rowley wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

Rowley wrote:  

However I do feel far too often “that’s just his natural game” is used as a cover all excuse to gloss over what can very often be poor shot choices.

Now after all these years of knowing what he is....is that a basis for Flower to issue an ultimatum to ECB

No, but then has anyone argued it is?

that is what the poster has titled the thread and debating in this thread.
Which poster has started this thread

Mike Selig wrote:I have long given up trying to engage KPF on matters concerning England in general (by the way, anything to say about the medium-pace trundler Broad's performance on this tour?) and KP and Flower in particular. It is a shame, because he makes good sense on other topics, and occasionally makes good points even with re to the above, but they are lost in amongst the nonsense and the assumption that the world is black and white.

I suggest again for the peace of these boards that other sensible posters do likewise and don't feed the WUM. It is very tiresome.

.

paraphrased to English....
" self styled , self imagined commander of troops sees a losing battle.....waves the white towel...... and is rounding the troops for a retreat  

Nachos Jones wrote: ... KP ...

... always trouble. It's something that has followed him from every team, club and country and under different captains and management ...

Not quite. My earlier post refers.

KPF, we all know from experience that all you will do is ignore any points anybody makes against your case (as you have already done with my previous posts on this topic, and as you have done with the above as per usual refusing to answer a straight question), repeat your arguments ad infinum (without ever taking into consideration what anyone else is actually saying), misrepresent everybody's posts (as per above) and then quote some article in a newspaper or from CI verbatim as if that somehow proves your point.

There is absolutely no point in debating with you because you are on these issues incapable of debate. For the sake of peace on these boards and my blood pressure, I am hence not going to bother. My position is clearly stated in my posts above, so there is no white towel raised, just a refusal to engage with someone who has proven again incapable of engaging in return.

I repeat my plea for other sensible posters to do likewise.

Rowley wrote:, but when you have previous for this sort of thing there is an air of inevitability that people will make inferences around common demoninators and such like. To expect otherwise is beyond naive.

and Flower is using the perceptions stated by you.... to stir up a side-show......and digress everone's attention from the debacle.

He is being dishonest to a man who is in his team......and dishonest to the millions of followers of the game

Mike Selig wrote:KPF, we all know from experience that all

Dear Mike,

"we" ?
can you for my benefit do a roll call......who are the troops in your command that you are representing ??   

Best Regards

KP had a poor tour by his standards but was still our highest run scorer. Bell got worse as the tour went on and Cook had one good innings and an absolute mare with the captaincy. No way KP should be cast to one side. He should be made vice captain. He's an attacking batsmen with a positive outlook on cricket in general, and would provide a nice balance between Cook's more negative style with his positive style.

Yes sometimes he plays poor shots but who doesn't. When it comes off we're all loving it. That innings against SA was probably the best I have ever seen in my time watching cricket. Australia just bowled very well and executed game plans superbly. Time to move on, keep our best experienced players together whilst introducing younger players into the team. Flower can stay as long as he and Cook are willing to change their styles, act more on instinct rather than regimented plans that cannot be strayed from.

Mike Selig wrote:KPF, we all know from experience that all you will do is ignore any points anybody makes against your case (as you have already done with my previous posts on this topic, and as you have done with the above as per usual refusing to answer a straight question), repeat your arguments ad infinum (without ever taking into consideration what anyone else is actually saying), misrepresent everybody's posts (as per above) and then quote some article in a newspaper or from CI verbatim as if that somehow proves your point.

There is absolutely no point in debating with you because you are on these issues incapable of debate. For the sake of peace on these boards and my blood pressure, I am hence not going to bother. My position is clearly stated in my posts above, so there is no white towel raised, just a refusal to engage with someone who has proven again incapable of engaging in return.

I repeat my plea for other sensible posters to do likewise.

Hear, hear.

banbrotam wrote: 



What you're basically asking Flower to do, is to let him do what he wants, i.e.
   

some facts about KP:

--highest number of runs in the current series..

--Highest test runs in the current Eng team

--2nd highest number of centuries ever for England

--Highest career batting average in current team...47.28

--fourth highest run getter for Eng is tests and with a 5 point average higher than the 3 above him   

--One more year and he will be omn top of the summit as Eng's highest run scorer ever

Liam wrote:KP had a poor tour by his standards [...]

In fairness KP had a poor tour by anyone's standards (without checking in great detail but I guess his average overall was similar to Bailey's? who everyone agrees wasn't very good...). That he still finished England's best run-scorer (although surely Stokes had a higher average) just goes to show how poor England were collectively.

I just want to make one (only slightly mischievous, if off topic) point. Whilst we are all ready to criticise (and with good reason) the England management for overall getting it completely wrong on this tour, they haven't received any kind of credit for picking Stokes (in spite of many people's reticence or even bemusement at the time - myself included). That was a big call, and I think we can all agree a brave call which they got right. In all the criticism of not picking Finn, picking Tremlett on the tour, moving Root about, etc. etc. that does seem to have been entirely forgotten.

Mike Selig wrote:

Liam wrote:KP had a poor tour by his standards [...]

In fairness KP had a poor tour by anyone's standards (without checking in great detail but I guess his average overall was similar to Bailey's? who everyone agrees wasn't very good...). That he still finished England's best run-scorer (although surely Stokes had a higher average) just goes to show how poor England were collectively.

I just want to make one (only slightly mischievous, if off topic) point. Whilst we are all ready to criticise (and with good reason) the England management for overall getting it completely wrong on this tour, they haven't received any kind of credit for picking Stokes (in spite of many people's reticence or even bemusement at the time - myself included). That was a big call, and I think we can all agree a brave call which they got right. In all the criticism of not picking Finn, picking Tremlett on the tour, moving Root about, etc. etc. that does seem to have been entirely forgotten.

I was happy to see Stokes picked at the time of his selection. He got a run in the side because of Trott's unfortunate problems and the lad took his chance. Don't think Stokes was really there in England's plan A or B for that matter, but Trott's issues, coupled with their call to go in with 2 spinners in the 2nd game, besides the poor form from Ballance in the early part of the tour opened up the way for Stokes who took his chance. Credit for the management for picking him, in a tour where they got almost everything wrong.

msp83 wrote:   Credit for the management for picking him, in a tour where they got almost everything wrong.

Stokes has made it  is inspite of the management not because of them.

He was one test away from being dropped for good....like Woakes before him or Rankin after him....had he not gotten...I wouldn't call a freak...but a very unlikely hundred on debut

this management has a track record of messing up newcomers: Let's look at the list

1) Root
2) Compton
3) Woakes
4) Kerrigan
5) Rankin
6) Onions

did i miss some.....I am sure I did

KP_fan wrote:

Rowley wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

Rowley wrote:  

However I do feel far too often “that’s just his natural game” is used as a cover all excuse to gloss over what can very often be poor shot choices.

Now after all these years of knowing what he is....is that a basis for Flower to issue an ultimatum to ECB

No, but then has anyone argued it is?

that is what the poster has titled the thread and debating in this thread.
Which poster has started this thread

I'm sorry KP, you'll have to forgive me if I am being a bit thick but I have literally no idea what point you are trying to make here. Asking me which poster wrote the thread is a bit pointless, I do know it was me, and even if I forgot my name is on it as a gentle reminder. I wrote the thread because I though, even if it is a rumour a fall out between arguably the most important person in English cricket and the most talented was worthy of discussion. I also thought it would stimulate debate, which perhaps naively I thought was the point of a forum.

At no point in the original thread did I apportion blame, I was conscious to avoid doing so. I merely threw out what I thought were some of the questions the article by Selvey raised. I am sure there are countless others and countless ways of answering these questions, which returns us to the point of stimulating debate.

Similarly at no point have I claimed any of my opinions are facts because I am bright enough to know the difference between the two. In a similar vein I have not claimed any of the opinions I have put forward are the definitive answers to the questions the article raised. I am not arrogant enough to do so or confident enough in my knowledge of the sport to consider doing so. However I do have opinions on the questions raised by the thread because if you are of reasonable intelligence and you read something you tend to form an opinion of it, whether right or wrong. I cannot and will not apologise for that and certainly will not apologise for arriving at an opinion that does not coincide with yours.

guildfordbat wrote:

Nachos Jones wrote: ... KP ...

... always trouble. It's something that has followed him from every team, club and country and under different captains and management ...

Not quite. My earlier post refers.

Mark Butcher was on sky sports news earlier saying about how KP at Surrey is basically as you described in your post Guildford.

Thanks, Olly. Didn't see it but, as per my post, not surprised.

[quote="KP_fan"]

msp83 wrote:   ...

this management has a track record of messing up newcomers: Let's look at the list

1) Root
...

He was doing really fine at 6 then they moved him to opener for the summer and apart from one fine innings and two decent innings he failed at that position. The winter Ashes has been more miss than hit but the whole team was more miss than hit (apart from a few exceptions).

Root certainly needs to go and work at his technique, particularly when on the front foot but the management well and truly messed up with his positioning in the order. Should have stayed at 6 and was looking as the solution to the troubled position of 6 since Collingwood departed. He shouldn't open if you ask me, unless he sorts his technique out.

To be fair, Root was scoring runs down the order and Compton hadn't made the openers positions anything like his own. Given that Root opens for Yorkshire in the CC and that he looked at home at international level, I don't think it was that bad a decision to move him up there. In hindsight, it clearly was and you could argue that they should have seen it coming from looking at his technique, scoring areas and seeing him bat in nets but it was a reasonable decision at the time. And then, of course, the selectors hand was forced to move Root back up the order again after Trott's unfortunate departure. You can argue that Bell should have been the man to move up, but that's a gut call from the selectors. I don't think either of them would have succeeded wherever they batted given how the tour went.

KP_fan wrote:

banbrotam wrote: 



What you're basically asking Flower to do, is to let him do what he wants, i.e.
   

some facts about KP:

--highest number of runs in the current series..

--Highest test runs in the current Eng team

--2nd highest number of centuries ever for England

--Highest career batting average in current team...47.28

--fourth highest run getter for Eng is tests and with a 5 point average higher than the 3 above him   

--One more year and he will be omn top of the summit as Eng's highest run scorer ever

--Averages 33, in the last year   

KP_fan wrote:

banbrotam wrote: 



What you're basically asking Flower to do, is to let him do what he wants, i.e.
   

some facts about KP:

 --One more year and he will be omn top of the summit as Eng's highest run scorer ever

 
Not exactly the definition of a fact there. Also couldn't you make a list of "facts" about Flower and make him sound quite good based on a record accumulated over a few years

JDizzle wrote:To be fair, Root was scoring runs down the order and Compton hadn't made the openers positions anything like his own. Given that Root opens for Yorkshire in the CC and that he looked at home at international level, I don't think it was that bad a decision to move him up there. In hindsight, it clearly was and you could argue that they should have seen it coming from looking at his technique, scoring areas and seeing him bat in nets but it was a reasonable decision at the time. And then, of course, the selectors hand was forced to move Root back up the order again after Trott's unfortunate departure. You can argue that Bell should have been the man to move up, but that's a gut call from the selectors. I don't think either of them would have succeeded wherever they batted given how the tour went.

Adding tonthe above It's always been the long term plan to move him up the order.
If anything it was accelearated by his brilliant start and comptons drop in form.

And going back to KP... Lets not forget Root was dropped on attitude as well as his lack of runs. The idea that kp is being scapegoated doesnt really stack up so neatly.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

And going back to KP... Lets not forget Root was dropped on attitude as well as his lack of runs. The idea that kp is being scapegoated doesnt really stack up so neatly.

Peter - there was certainly a suggestion that Root's attitude was a factor in him being dropped. If so, do we blame Root for having the attitude or Flower/ Cook for not stamping it out earlier (or both sides)?

Whilst this may indicate Pietersen isn't being scapegoated, does it also raise questions over the effectiveness of the positive influence being exerted by Flower and Cook? Or maybe, despite his choir boy looks, Root is simply a bad apple?

Typical of this whole matter, if someone gives me some clear facts I'll try to give some answers.

Would love to be a fly on the wall, in the England dressing room. Until, I get the chance, we'll keep on speculating.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:... Lets not forget Root was dropped on attitude as well as his lack of runs. The idea that kp is being scapegoated doesnt really stack up so neatly.

Root dropped for attitude? That seems like a cause for concern.

VTR wrote:

KP_fan wrote:

banbrotam wrote: 



What you're basically asking Flower to do, is to let him do what he wants, i.e.
   

some facts about KP:

 --One more year and he will be omn top of the summit as Eng's highest run scorer ever

 
Not exactly the definition of a fact there. Also couldn't you make a list of "facts" about Flower and make him sound quite good based on a record accumulated over a few years

I am interesting in putting facts for KP only....those interested in facts in favor of Flower.....are welcome to do so if there are any such distinguishing facts.

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

JDizzle wrote:To be fair, Root was scoring runs down the order and Compton hadn't made the openers positions anything like his own. Given that Root opens for Yorkshire in the CC and that he looked at home at international level, I don't think it was that bad a decision to move him up there. In hindsight, it clearly was and you could argue that they should have seen it coming from looking at his technique, scoring areas and seeing him bat in nets but it was a reasonable decision at the time. And then, of course, the selectors hand was forced to move Root back up the order again after Trott's unfortunate departure. You can argue that Bell should have been the man to move up, but that's a gut call from the selectors. I don't think either of them would have succeeded wherever they batted given how the tour went.

Adding tonthe above It's always been the long term plan to move him up the order.
If anything it was accelearated by his brilliant start and comptons drop in form.

And going back to KP... Lets not forget Root was dropped on attitude as well as his lack of runs. The idea that kp is being scapegoated doesnt really stack up so neatly.

what do you mean Root was dropped on attitude ?

Flower helped get us to number one in the world in tests, beat India in India, and 4-0 at home, and help win three ashes series on the Trott.

That deserves some credit, even from you KP_fan?

Nore Staat wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:... Lets not forget Root was dropped on attitude as well as his lack of runs. The idea that kp is being scapegoated doesnt really stack up so neatly.

Root dropped for attitude?  That seems like a cause for concern.

Does seem that Flower, Cook and the management might have lost a bit of control over the players. Root rumoured to have been dropped, in part, due to 'attitude' problems. The rumours about KP and, in the Telegraph today, Matt Prior talks about people in the dressing room 'losing respect' for Cook and Flower.
That's a bit concerning.

As good a player Cook is, he doesn't look like he inspire's to me.

Stella wrote:Flower helped get us to number one in the world in tests, beat India in India, and 4-0 at home, and help win three ashes series on the Trott.

That deserves some credit, even from you KP_fan?

Thanks - saved me the effort. Would add the World T20 win to that list as well as reaching number one in ODIs.

Point is, listing a load of facts about KP (one of which wasn't a fact) does not really prove anything as those stats are accumulated over a number of years. Has to be judged how he is playing now or we would have Jack Hobbs opening the batting in the next Test. Someone has pointed out his average of 33 over the last 12 months which I think is a good point to counter the assumption that KP is indespensible (so must stay and Flower goes if that is the decision).

I am a fan of KP, would prefer him in the team but can accept that he is not entirely indespensible given his recent form.

Problem is, who replaces him , and remember, we need to find an opener, and a number three, first.

Stella wrote:Problem is, who replaces him , and remember, we need to find an opener, and a number three, first.

I agree there isn't really anyone compelling so in my opinion he stays. I still feel there a few KP specials left in him so would be a big shame if he went now. Equally I think some fair points being made for the converse argument - respecting and considering the views of others, its a shame a certain poster on here is unable to do that!

VTR wrote:

Stella wrote:Flower helped get us to number one in the world in tests, beat India in India, and 4-0 at home, and help win three ashes series on the Trott.

That deserves some credit, even from you KP_fan?

Thanks - saved me the effort. Would add the World T20 win to that list as well as reaching number one in ODIs.

Point is, listing a load of facts about KP (one of which wasn't a fact) does not really prove anything as those stats are accumulated over a number of years. Has to be judged how he is playing now or we would have Jack Hobbs opening the batting in the next Test. Someone has pointed out his average of 33 over the last 12 months which I think is a good point to counter the assumption that KP is indespensible (so must stay and Flower goes if that is the decision).

I am a fan of KP, would prefer him in the team but can accept that he is not entirely indespensible given his recent form.

I would have also make a similar argument

--that what Flower did in the past is creditable but he cannot rest on his laurels.... his side steadily declined and then crashed with a thump.
--he will be judged on current 5-0 debacle .....as KP is being judged for his current form.
--in favour of KP though he stood out as the highest run getter in the carnage and one who wasn't the least flustered by the pace...nor one who mentally brok down wholly or partially.
In the context of the carnage around.....KP is a success story of the tour...relatively speaking

Stella wrote:Problem is, who replaces him , and remember, we need to find an opener, and a number three, first.

As well as our front line spinner, I know it is a different position but still another new player needs integrating into the team and dressing room. Don't think it takes too much thought to realise trying to blood too many new faces is going to be tough.

Stella wrote:Problem is, who replaces him , and remember, we need to find an opener, and a number three, first.

England have to do that anyway.

Hoggy_Bear wrote: . Root rumoured to have been dropped, in part, due to 'attitude' problems. The rumours about KP and, in the Telegraph today, Matt Prior talks about people in the dressing room 'losing respect' for Cook and Flower.
That's a bit concerning.

Root part is surprising ?
telegraph reported Root was dropped to teach a lesson to someone else......

Matt Prior should be fined for leaking dressing room secrets and fuelling rumor-mill

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Stella wrote:Problem is, who replaces him , and remember, we need to find an opener, and a number three, first.

England have to do that anyway.

They do, but why have another headache?

Hi all. Not been on for a day or so...just read through this whole thread.
It was quite an ordeal.

To sum up , what started as an attempt to discuss an unattributed and possibly speculative article by Mike Selvey about an alleged (and subsequently denied) ultimatum issued by Flower to his employers regarding a member of his team , has generated three pages of sometimes heated argument about who should get the boot - even though none of us has any real information about the veracity of the initial article ; or much more than guesswork about why these two individuals are (apparently) unable to work together. And even though they both say they want to carry on. And Flower has specifically denied having made any decisions about any players. Is that right ?

My tuppence worth : KP is a terrific player , despite recent form being a bit off ( not Robinson Crusoe there !). KP also has a reputation for being a bit difficult to handle. Anyone going to dispute those points ?

KP says he wants to play a couple more years ; which is surely a good thing for England . Obviously he will only get to do so if his form warrants it. He will also be expected to conform with the requirements of the management - hardly unreasonable , I would have thought. And surely , if he wants to play on , something he will be willing to accept ?

Flower is known to have had problems with Pietersen in the past. Whose fault ? Don't know , don't care (though it is often a bit of both ) : it is the manager's job to get the best out of his players ; and for all the fussing , when KP was "reintegrated" , everything seemed to go smoothly enough ; KP made runs , England won in India... Only now , when an unexpected defeat has everyone looking for scapegoats , the media are in a fever to promote a KP v Flower standoff even in the absence of any hard news.

It may be that Flower does believe Pietersen is having a serious adverse effect on the dressing room. It is possible he has issues with other players...but we just don't know. So it seems to me pointless to work ourselves into a lather over what is going to happen and who to blame if it does...

I want to see KP in the England Test Team for the next two years ; and as I have already said more than once , I am of the belief that Andy Flower is probably the best qualified man to take England through the necessary period of transition. I shall be sorry if these two wishes are mutually exclusive ; but since I do not believe Flower is stubborn or stupid enough to cut off his nose (or his most talented batsman's career) merely out of spite , then he will only usher KP out of the England scene if there is a serious and unresolvable problem in the dressing room. And I don't think he will get to make such a decision on his own.

I think a manager should always do his level best to accommodate a talented maverick for the good of the team : but if the situation becomes impossible then sometimes the only solution is a parting of the ways. I hope - and think - that both parties will be sensible enough to ensure that it doesn't come to that.

But of course ; I am just guessing . Like the rest of you.

By the way : I hasten to add that I do not mean to imply by my above rant that there has been nothing of worth on this thread : there have been many good points made.

Also been a lot of waffle though   

Stella wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Stella wrote:Problem is, who replaces him , and remember, we need to find an opener, and a number three, first.

England have to do that anyway.

They do, but why have another headache?

I think thats the argument for getting rid of him ....

In the end, everything awful that happened on this tour was a team failing. Individuals made individual errors, but when so many are made, that is indicative of a systemic problem. Lack of fight, infighting, ridiculed preparation are all team problems and despite disruptive players, the one man i can envisage feasibly habinh yhis much influence across an entire team is the coach. Defensive plays can be pinned on Cook but he is captaining the match in the way that Flower has requested him. This isn't like a 5-0 defeat in football, where everything could go badly for 90 mins. It was everything going badly for an entire tour of 5 day matches. Flower can't play for his team, and he is not the one throwing away his wicket or giving Aus runs but he is the one training them and selecting them and providing Cook's tactics. If anyone must go, it is indefensible that he tries to claim it shouldn't be him

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Stella wrote:

Peter Seabiscuit Wheeler wrote:

Stella wrote:Problem is, who replaces him , and remember, we need to find an opener, and a number three, first.

England have to do that anyway.

They do, but why have another headache?

I think thats the argument for getting rid of him ....

Well yes, but I was arguing more with the idea he isn't good enough, because he averages 33 in the last year.

Who IS good enough?

Btw, I'm not adverse to dropping KP except that I now think it shouldn't be done just because Flower has had the cheek to make this into a him or me game, an action I find childish in any citcumstance. Drop them both

ChequeredJersey wrote:Who IS good enough?

Btw, I'm not adverse to dropping KP except that I now think it shouldn't be done just because Flower has had the cheek to make this into a him or me game, an action I find childish in any circumstance. Drop them both

Hes denied he has, but equally isnt it reasonable to say if you want me to see through the transformation of this side please don not select players i dont think can be part of that because :
They are injured
We cant guarantee their availability
Their long term form does not justify a place
Other players will not play with them
They cant be coached


(all of which may or may not actually be the case)
Its hardly childish to suggest the staff suitable for getting the job done, if the above are true. I would resign my position if I was given staff I believed not suitable for the job and were also being held accountable for their actions.

If its as simple as KP and Flower disagree over the price of bread and hes refusing to work with him then sure yeah. But Ive yet to see any evidence that KP is being scapegoated by Flower, at no time has Flower publicly critisized him. Its hardly the best media manipulation to deny rifts and get Swann to deny he blamed KP for his decision to walk.

We all agree that the psychology of the team and issues in the dressing room must have played a part in the huge shift in Englands fortunes and playing ability. How much of that is Flowers fault and how much is KPS we dont know, but I would expect the guy in charge to be doing things to long term sort out the issues. If he feels that KP has been given too many chances and that including him will damage the long term rebuilding then shouldnt we praise him for having the guts to do the unthinkable?

Flower picks the match day sides right? So even if KP is included in squads he wouldnt actually have to select him on the day?

He has the right to say: I don't think these players should be selected due to form, uncoachability, other factors, but saying "I won't stay if he does" (I accept this may be misinformation, very likely with our media, but if that is the case then there is no issue to discuss on this thread) then frankly a) he's not doing his job properly. If he isn't willing to not select a player for the match squad, can't control the mood in the dressing room and can't coach him, he's not good enough at his job
B) by forcing a choice in a moment in which he is frankly at his weakest and in a tour that failed so badly partially BECAUSE he didn't learn anything from the Ashes at home, he's an idiot and I don't want a stupid coach
C) if one thing is enough to make up his mind about whether he wishes to continue or not, I think that inherently shows lack of commitment


In essence he's doing everything that KP is often (maybe correctly) accused of doing

a good article has appeared in CI...and inspite of Flower's denial regarding the ultimatum.......CI still writes believing that there is a "KP-or-I " situation created by Flower.
It is quite obvious that this issue is real as current and ex players ( Vaughan and Prior) are talking about it....nobody in the media is backing-off from analyzing this issue inspite of the facile denials issued by Flower



Flower, KP and the England blame game
The blame game seems all the rage at the moment. Andy Flower and Kevin Pietersen are both attracting flak and English cricket is all the worse for it
Andrew McGlashan


Andy Flower chats with Kevin Pietersen, Trent Bridge, July 9, 2013
Life behind the dark glasses for Andy Flower and Kevin Pietersen is hard to comprehend © Getty Images

The blame game seems all the rage at the moment.

It's obvious, isn't it, that Kevin Pietersen was entirely at fault for the 5-0 Ashes score? He constantly falls out with coaches and management; plays irresponsible shots; doesn't pull his weight; fields on the boundary; gives warm-up matches short shrift; is a bad influence on younger players and, of course, he wants to play in the IPL.

Or is it? How about it is Andy Flower who can't work with Pietersen; those irresponsible shots were an attempt to wrestle some initiative back (this is, after all, was an England team called too timid and defensive); he was his team's top scorer and if someone had helped him could have laid a foundation for a win in Melbourne; he has never been much of a catcher so why not field on the boundary; he trains as hard as anyone and if those young players have his work ethic they will go far; and all England contracts now allow for an extended IPL window.

The ECB dropped the ball on Twenty20, it's not the players' fault for wanting their slice. Those that want to play should not be castigated, just as those who decline should not be made out to be saints.

The point is not to suggest that either side of the Flower-Pietersen argument is wrong or right - some of those examples are too simplistic - but just to encourage some rational thinking in the whole affair.

It is a good job Flower is no longer in day-to-day charge of the one-day side and to a lesser extent that Pietersen is rested because everyone just needs to take a step back and a deep breath. In defence of Flower, that is what he has publicly said he wants to do.

Clearly differences have emerged on the tour - these things tend to happen during a whitewash - but no one believed that Flower and Pietersen would become bosom buddies after what happened in 2012. Even before then it was fairly obvious it was nothing more than a professional relationship. Flower, remember, was part of Peter Moores' backroom staff when the debacle between Pietersen and Moores occurred at the end of 2008. Then when Pietersen left the 2011 World Cup injured, Flower made it clear that he thought the batsman could have battled through the pain.

Neither does it sound like Pietersen, if he has transgressed, was the only one. Matt Prior, in his Daily Telegraph column, talked in general terms about the team losing their respect, becoming lazy with little details such as dress code and team meetings. They sound trivial, but also sound strikingly similar to what happened to Australia in India.

During that episode four players were suspended for not doing 'homework'. One of them was Mitchell Johnson, now an Ashes legend, along with Shane Watson, a key part of Australia's side, and James Pattinson who can still develop into a world-class quick. Only Usman Khawaja has drifted off the scene.

The man to pay the biggest price, ultimately, was Mickey Arthur. His reputation has taken a hammering due to how his Australian career ended, but he remains a highly credentialed coach. In the end, Cricket Australia decided it was him, rather than some potential bad influences among the players, who needed removing.

That is not to say the same should happen to Flower - it clearly won't, given the support he has within the walls of the ECB boardroom. The only way he will leave is if he is not backed over his Pietersen stance, once it becomes apparent how extreme that stance will be.

Flower had his chance once to remove Pietersen from English cricket and was talked around, in no small part to Alastair Cook and it remains to seen how much influence Cook (who is in Australia for another three weeks) will have this time. The call has been for Cook to be allowed to build the team in his mould, but Flower will be in a tough position if that mould still includes Pietersen.