KP of the Overflow - Continued....

And the bush hath friends to meet him, and their kindly voices greet him

In the murmur of the breezes and the river on its bars,

And he sees the vision splendid of the sunlit plains extended,

And at night the wond'rous glory of the everlasting stars.



The real question is - how many times can a thread get bumped to make the same point ad nauseam?

VTR wrote:The real question is - how many times can a thread get bumped to make the same point ad nauseam?

Not too much longer. soon it will implode under it's own weight.

kingraf wrote:Textgate is a lot worse than the Twitter account. The Autobiography though was the death knell. And I can't believe it was written without him realising this was the point of no return. The CEO was wrong to give him false hope, but that's what happens when non cricketing people are in charge.

Also it's worth noting that KP hasn't exactly been pivotal to continued success.

I can't understand how an act of public ridicule instigated by teammates be considered any less in implication than private conversations with people who were considered friends?
Anyways my point is not to suggest Pietersen is not to be blamed at all, he has to take a lot of the responsibility for this mess. However, Strauss, Flower, players like Broad, Prior, Swann, the ECB management structure, Cook Downton, all have their more than fair share of blame. And the point is that Pietersen was 'reintegrated' after textgate, and there is absolutely no credible, or no real explanation as such for why he was sacked a 2nd time, then unsacked but declared unselectable by Strauss. As all parties are involved in the mess, victimizing Pietersen alone is unfair.

msp83 wrote:

kingraf wrote:Textgate is a lot worse than the Twitter account. The Autobiography though was the death knell. And I can't believe it was written without him realising this was the point of no return. The CEO was wrong to give him false hope, but that's what happens when non cricketing people are in charge.

Also it's worth noting that KP hasn't exactly been pivotal to continued success.

I can't understand how an act of public ridicule instigated by teammates be considered any less in implication than private conversations with people who were considered friends?

Because it can be proved that Pietersen sent the texts, but not proved that any England players were involved in the Twitter account?

kingraf wrote:Textgate is a lot worse than the Twitter account. The Autobiography though was the death knell. And I can't believe it was written without him realising this was the point of no return. The CEO was wrong to give him false hope, but that's what happens when non cricketing people are in charge.

Also it's worth noting that KP hasn't exactly been pivotal to continued success.

Hi Raf - I'm certain that the Autobiography was written with Pietersen understanding that the point of no return had already been passed following Downton's pronouncements and the ending of his central contract. At Pietersen's request, Surrey cancelled his contract with them shortly before the book came out; this meant that with no central contract and no county contract, the ECB (as an employer or the parent organisation of an employer) had their wings massively clipped as to any action they could take against the player.

The ECB could of course have still attempted to sue for libel if they had so wished. The same applies to any individual mentioned in the book. As far as I am aware, neither the ECB or anyone else has gone down that path. Some may consider that telling.

Back to Surrey. On separate occasions in December 2014 and late January this year, Alec Stewart confirmed to members that he was still waiting to hear from Pietersen as to whether he wished to play for the county this season and, if so, on what terms. Availability and in what formats was key to Stewart. It was clear that Stewart's patience was running out and that he wasn't overly encouraging about a re-signing. I think Stewart's words were, ''If he phones me, he phones me. If he does, he'll probably reverse the charges.''

If Graves had not opened his big mouth to the press and Pietersen, I doubt that Stewart would ever have received that call.

Graves was dumb to open his mouth. Did Pietersen then speak to anyone to clarify things before re-signing?

LondonTiger wrote:Graves was dumb to open his mouth. Did Pietersen then speak to anyone to clarify things before re-signing?

We certainly agree about Graves. I also agree with your implication about Pietersen hearing what he wanted to hear. I do though understand he had more than one meeting with Graves and - given the size, structure and over staffing typically associated with the ECB - I doubt that was just the two of them. I have heard Tom Harrison's name mentioned on the ECB side and believe that Pietersen is especially gunning for him now.

msp83 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Azzy wrote:Deadly serious. I don't like KP as a person, I don't think we should have Saffers, Aussies or Kiwis playing for England, but that's where we are. I stopped supporting the England football team when Gary Neville and Rio Ferdinand took the England squad to the brink of a strike on the eve of a game - I am now doing the same under the Cosy Club (TM) regime. They have zero interest in what is good for English cricket. What's the message, work hard, score runs, be a good little boy and keep your mouth shut or else you'll never play for us?

Pathetic.

Azzy you know there is far more to it than that. He'd already transgressed with Text-gate and got re-integrated into the side and probably warned about his future conduct so the when he lost his place in the side - it is simple you keep your gob shut, go away and work to get back into the side. Simples. But no he then brings out a ruddy book slating team-mates with allegations I find fanciful to say the least. What the hell did he expect after that? Go on tell me.

In any line of work now it is a sackable offence to even go onto Facebook and criticise management in any way. This book went far further and yet you are saying he still should get back in the side?? Sorry...no, no and thrice no.

He 'lost his place'!!!!. Sorry that is , well I don't know how to describe that. He was not dropped on form grounds, it was not even a drop as such, he was sacked, his contract paid out, his character assassinated, all these without a credible explanation....... So how exactly was he supposed to work his way back? By licking the boots of Alastair Cook, Paul Downton and others? What on earth are you talking about?
And you talk about textgate, and I see you are silent on the parity twitter account set up by Stuart Broad and others. Of course you must be believing the ECB version that it was created in Broad's house by a friend without his knowledge? Of course you would consider it in great team spirit that Matt Prior and a few other players followed this disparaging twitter account? Of course you would consider it brilliant management by Strauss and Flower that they took no action on this attempt at raising the spirits of the side? #strausslogic!!!!
As an aside, have you read Graeme Swann's book?

No you keep your head down and concentrate on your own form, wait until the press come calling and then drop hints he'd love to play for England again. If he had gone down that route I think there would have been an excellent chance for him. But no he brings out a book doing character assassination on ECB and teammates. In any line of work that is a sackable offence. End of story. The matter closed with that book.

Why KP should think there was any way back after his book came out, I can't think.
However, why Graves should appear to open the door to KP given all that had gone on is weird.
Alas, anyone who has played cricket at any level will tell you how corrosive it is to have an unhappy dressing room. Due to its time length, cricket is more vulnerable to the problem of lack of team spirit than most sports.
There's also no getting away from the fact that KP is as self-centred as you can get and hardly the brightest button in the box. The fact that one of his biggest supporters is Piers Morgan speaks volumes.

In any case there is a heck of a lot of assumptions here that KP was to be England's saviour. His England test average is at its lowest it has ever been taking a nose dive in the last two years of his test career. Wake up and smell the coffee - past his best and understandably so considering he is 34. And spare me the nonsense of the other players who have played on until 40. Big difference was they maintained high scoring throughout whereas KP s runs at test level were drying up . Once it has gone, it has gone.

Sachin Tendulkar averaged somewhere in the 20s in 2006, and from 2005 to early 2007 he did struggle for consistency and looked a shadow of his former self.
Next 4 years were as good as any though.......

Like I said all irrelevant.

Use social media to bring your place of employment into disrepute is an instant dismissal offence in the UK. Pretty sure South Africa or India or anywhere in the world will be similar. That book was the death knell.

Didn't Colin Graves the incoming ECB head know that? And why was such a person offered a consultant role?

I am not here to protect Graves or the ECB. I have said their handling of this and Moore's affair has been utterly shambolic. But that still doesn't change the fact that Pietersen broke the golden rule and for that there is absolutely no way back.

msp83 wrote:Didn't Colin Graves the incoming ECB head know that? And why was such a person offered a consultant role?

Well now that is a bit strange I agree. However after considering it for a while it has occurred to me that the offer may have been made as a bit of a test of Pietersen's capacity for reform.
Consider : Strauss did tell him he wouldn't be considered for the Test Team this summer ; but although that may appear to have closed the door on his ambitions , he did leave the cat flap open ..."no guarantees" but KP was not banned from ever appearing for England again. Raising the possibility that a return (perhaps to the ODI team ?) might be a chance in the not too far distant future ...could an involvement with the ODI squad have been a stepping stone ? The players with whom he has issues are unlikely to feature in that team...
Of course that is speculation ; and anyway I didn't expect KP to take it up . But it makes more sense than any other theory I've heard...

By the way , msp : why are you , as an Indian fan , so fanatical about the Pietersen case ? Enthusiasm for justice , OK , I can understand ; but you really seem to be taking over from KP fan as his campaign manager ...not having a go at you , genuine question.

Alfie - I'm in no position to answer for msp and make no attempt to do so. Also, his support for Pietersen seems considerably greater than mine.

I would though make a few points largely in his favour:

* I was privileged to see his triple century (there's a post on the ''Surrey v Leics'' thread). Anyone who claims he is too old or no longer good enough as a batsman (I stress here ''as a batsman'') to be in contention for a place is simply wrong. Leics are clearly not a strong Test attack but they are not the complete servers up of buffet bowling that some here have made them out to be; the Aussie McKay was certainly sharp. Even against ordinary bowling, world class powers of concentration are needed to go on to register an unbeaten score in excess of 350. Furthermore, his marshalling of the tail was outstanding. All this in a side of proven (Sangakkara definitely, Davies possibly) and emerging (Roy, Burns, Ansari) batting talent whose second highest score was a measly 36.

* As for Pietersen the man, he's been associated with Surrey since 2010 and there have never been any problems with him. There may be an element of ''last chance saloon'' helping him behave at the Oval but if he was as naturally corrosive as his critics claim, wouldn't that have surfaced some time in the last five years? I find it particularly disappointing that the ECB have never sought to talk to Alec Stewart and Surrey ''to solve a problem like Kevin''.

* Pietersen has done - probably over done - all the things Graves asked of him to get back in the frame. That appeared to offer a genuine chance of wiping the slate clean. Whilst Pietersen has never been my favourite person, I don't like anyone being ''led down the garden path''. Bob Willis said the other night that the ECB through their incompetence had made him feel sorry for Pietersen, a situation he previously felt would have been impossible. I can appreciate those words.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Use social media to bring your place of employment into disrepute is an instant dismissal offence in the UK.

Completely untrue. I've seen it happen many, many times. Disciplinary for sure, but not instant dismissal. That's only for gross misconduct, and providing your own personal opinion on working conditions is legally not gross misconduct. If anything, you get sacked for that, you have grounds to sue your employer for unfair dismissal, intentional infliction of emotional and financial distress, impact on future earnings.

Yeah I can't disagree with much of that , guildford.

Point by point : I am in no doubt that Pietersen is still good enough to play for England. The innings you were just privileged to witness merely underscores that. But I suppose the question is whether or not he is still good enough to make his selection practically compulsory ? Having regard to age , fitness issues , and arguably a recent falling off in consistency , I'd suggest that is not quite so obvious...
Incidentally : it does seem he did indeed "marshall the tail" rather well in this innings. Which is interesting ; because one of the things that annoyed me in Australia in 2013 was that he made virtually no effort to do so. Symptom of disconnection ?

From all accounts he does seem to be happily settled at Surrey . Perhaps because he isn't there all that often ? Strike that , was a joke really ...but it is somewhat at odds with his past record in more than one place , is it not ? Perhaps the "last chance " thing is apposite ...or perhaps it is a sign of growing maturity.

Point three is the hard one for me. I was surprised when Graves stuck his oar in ( but then I was surprised when KP was defenestrated in the first place !) ... But to be honest I was even more surprised he actually did go to such trouble to take him up on his offer. Having done that , I agree it must have been galling to be put off again.( Not that I would have been rushing to pick him ; but I'd have preferred not to have seen him blanked for the while summer in advance)

Thing is though (and here I'm feeling awkward about trying to see this from all angles and coming across as totally indecisive ) : Graves was able to fly a kite without much in the way of consequences - and without access to much direct knowledge of all the background. Strauss , though , was at the centre of it all ; and is directly responsible for what goes on from here : he has much more to lose if his decisions bring harm rather than gain for England. And whatever sympathy one might have for Pietersen , it is surely England's interest that must come first , would you not agree ?
I am quite sure Strauss has made his decision from a belief that this is best for the team : suggestions that he is just victimizing KP out of spite are ludicrous , in my opinion - though if there is some subconscious bias working in there , is it so surprising ? And who should we blame for that ?
The ECB clearly messed up the whole thing 16 months ago . But we can't undo that now. I think "unbanning" him is a step in the right direction ; but I'd have preferred to have had him left with at least the possibility of selection later in the summer. Presume Strauss doesn't fancy the risk of a KP return during the Ashes so elected to rule it out from the off. He was quite candid that it was a "Trust" issue ; and that even after the summer he could offer no guarantee things would change. One could say he at least has not led KP any further up the garden path...perhaps it is a pity he didn't have charge of things in early 2014...

I do have some sympathy for KP . But I can be a bit ruthless when it comes to team versus individual ; so I am staying on the "sorry , mate , but that's how it is " side of the issue.

alfie wrote:

msp83 wrote:Didn't Colin Graves the incoming ECB head know that? And why was such a person offered a consultant role?

Well now that is a bit strange I agree.  However after considering it for a while it has occurred to me that the offer may have been made as a bit of a test of Pietersen's capacity for reform.
Consider :  Strauss did tell him he wouldn't be considered for the Test Team this summer ; but although that may appear to have closed the door on his ambitions , he did leave the cat flap open ..."no guarantees" but KP was not banned from ever appearing for England again.  Raising the possibility that a return (perhaps to the ODI team ?) might be a chance in the not too far distant future ...could an involvement with the ODI squad have been a stepping stone ? The players with whom he has issues are unlikely to feature in that team...
Of course that is speculation ; and anyway I didn't expect KP to take it up . But it makes more sense than any other theory I've heard...

By the way , msp : why are you , as an Indian fan , so fanatical about the Pietersen case ?  Enthusiasm for justice , OK , I can understand  ; but you really seem to be taking over from KP fan as his campaign manager ...not having a go at you , genuine question.

Alfie, I am basically a cricket lover, who happens to be from India. Of course I love to see India do well, but its the game that's more important as such. You might have seen me posting regularly on Bangladesh and Zimbabwe as well when they are playing.......
Now, right from 1996 when India toured England, I have been following England, on the radio, sometimes on TV and also on the internet, and by 2004 England had become my top favorite side along with India. The 2005 Ashes is one of my greatest cricketing experience, and Andrew Flintoff and Kevin Pietersen became part of my alltime favorite players.
Now, in all the years that I've followed the game, I find Kevin Pietersen to be a very unique and absolutely brilliant batsman. He's not in the Brian Lara league, but the way he could play impactful knocks out of nowhere, he's so breathtaking. In all the years that I've followed England, they haven't come close to producing a batsman of his quality. Wasting such talent, that too the way England has done it, is appalling in my view.
And it also appears to me as a question of justice and fairness, the way Pietersen was sacked in 2014, and the way he was misled and then let down now, I think there is serious injustice there.......
In saying all this, I am not denying that Pietersen is a difficult act to manage by all account, but he's not the first such player. Shane Warne was difficult, Fredye was difficult, Botham was difficult, Boycott was difficult.
Then there are the likes of Jesse Ryder. He was given chances time and again but each time he self-destructed, and there was a credible explanation as to why he doesn't play international cricket.
I haven't seen anything to suggest that KP is in the Ryder camp rather than in the Flintoff/Botham/Warne one.

You have great batsmen and then you have even rarer match-winning batsmen. Pietersen, like AB de Villiers, Virender Sehwag and Brian Lara, is of the latter kind.......

Alfie

Good post. For me, KP probably just about makes the list of England's best 11 players at the moment (courtesy of recent runs for Surrey and past history), but does not for me make the best team - too much baggage with too many of his team mates.

Imagine the tensions in the dressing room the first time he drops a catch off Broad or Anderson? Of course it almost certainly wouldn't be deliberate (KP was never the best catcher, even if he was an outstanding ground fielder), but the suspicion and lack of trust would raise its head again.

Hey msp , thanks for that expansion

I can see where you are coming from. But I fear we won't agree on this matter at all... I try to be fair ; but I think you're letting your understandable appreciation of Pietersen as a player somewhat cloud your judgement . Still that's just my view : it's a free country , etc.

Cheers ...

dummy_half wrote:Alfie

Good post. For me, KP probably just about makes the list of England's best 11 players at the moment (courtesy of recent runs for Surrey and past history), but does not for me make the best team - too much baggage with too many of his team mates.

Imagine the tensions in the dressing room the first time he drops a catch off Broad or Anderson? Of course it almost certainly wouldn't be deliberate (KP was never the best catcher, even if he was an outstanding ground fielder), but the suspicion and lack of trust would raise its head again.

Yeah , that seems to me the sort of thing Strauss - and some others - are concerned about. If everyone had managed to sort it all out over a few beers and were all pals again I've no doubt KP would be right in the mix...but as it is any extra runs he might bring to the party (assuming one of the three incumbent middle order players were failing in form or fitness) might be outweighed by the tensions that would inevitably arise from his return.
All arguable I suppose . But it is the issue ; though many of his supporters seem to think it can all be swept under the carpet. I guess everyone has a fairly entrenched position by now : and if that is the case just on here , imagine what it would be like in the dressing room...

Injustice? What injustice?

Ignore the incompetence of Graves and the ECB for a moment as it changes precious little.

If any one of us goes into the realm of social media and lambasts your employers it is a sackable offence. End of. And KP went further and brought out a book on it. And let's not harp on about it as he had already got off lightly in the TwitterGate matter. He got what many people in this life don't get - a second chance and he blew it in extraordinary fashion.

This thread should end here as there is nothing else to discuss here. KP broke the golden rule and that is that.

Adam Gilchrist and Shane Warne didn't share best of relations when they were playing along, and in fact it was pretty chilled......... But they both could play in the same side all that long with great success. But of course its the clique culture and keeping the clique that is important for the ECB.......
Lets hope the clique can now bring success to England in the NZ tour and the Ashes.......
And perhaps in the not too distant future, England can unearth or import a batsman with Pietersen's ability who can fit into whatever team culture they are talking about.......

Exactly which rule says that criticizing your employer on social media is a sackable offense?

msp83 wrote:Exactly which rule says that criticizing your employer on social media is a sackable offense?

It is a common law/rule within all companies I know of. Run a check on it if you wish and you will find it is correct.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

msp83 wrote:Exactly which rule says that criticizing your employer on social media is a sackable offense?

It is a common law/rule within all companies I know of. Run a check on it if you wish and you will find it is correct.

It is not.

Azzy wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

msp83 wrote:Exactly which rule says that criticizing your employer on social media is a sackable offense?

It is a common law/rule within all companies I know of. Run a check on it if you wish and you will find it is correct.

It is not.

Yes it is. You cannot go into social media and say anything that will cause damage to or embarrassment to that company.

Why do you think on Facebook you don't see swathes of posts with various employees slating their managers etc.

I see it daily where I work. It's at best a first offence under disciplinary proceedings. If you sack someone for that it's unfair dismissal unless your contract of employment with the company expressly states you agree not to do that.

Azzy wrote:I see it daily where I work. It's at best a first offence under disciplinary proceedings. If you sack someone for that it's unfair dismissal unless your contract of employment with the company expressly states you agree not to do that.

And are you suggesting the ECB don't have such a term put in after TwitterGate? Oh come on I'll bet they made sure that was then put in. 

If you are in a job in public eye and you are representting that company it is a definite law. I know and know of employees to have been sacked because of it.

msp83 wrote:Exactly which rule says that criticizing your employer on social media is a sackable offense?

Msp - my post to Raf on this thread earlier today comments to some extent on the employment law position. Worth noting that Pietersen (astutely) made sure he had no employer when the book came out.

From a practical viewpoint though, it can't be denied that the book has greatly contributed to Pietersen's treatment by the ECB and own sense of harm. This then gets us back on the recurring wheel of the book would never have been published if (1) Downton hadn't binned him in the first place and (2) Graves or someone similar had spoken earlier.

No I don't buy No.1. Stacks of players have been sacked in their time- it happens. I wouldn't of had a problem him holding fire on the book until after his retirement - the real time to do it. No issues then but no he didn't do that. I would say it was an ego thing wherein he got away with TwitterGate and felt he was untouchable and could do whatever he wanted without punishment. How wrong he was.

Seems the OP has defaulted to me! - so do I now have to bump this thread repeatedly for the next 3 years every time KP does anything?

As an aside, Guildford, do you think there will be result today? Leics with a 132 run lead and 7 down. It's the last day is it not?

KP_f.... I hope you are happy your favourite player/subject thread continues.
Obviously it's wearing thin with Craig but he is entitled to his opinion, of course.
He makes some sensible points which are just as valid as the rationale behind the 'yaes'. Possibly even more so.

VTR - when I 'peeled off' the 993rd post on the last thread, yours was it! It was quite a pertinent comment really... looking back on it.
Consider yourself to be the Chosen One. I hope you don't mind too much.

Just because your name is up there in the OP; that in no way means that you are responsible for keeping this particular fire alight.
I am... and I alone (with KP_f) shall take all responsibility if it blows over from time to time.

I've added a few words from "Clancy of The Overflow" by Banjo Paterson, published in The Bulletin on 21 December 1889.
How he would have known that KP would some day play for the Melbourne Stars.... is truly amazing!

alfie wrote:Yeah I can't disagree with much of that , guildford.

Point by point :  I am in no doubt that Pietersen is still good enough to play for England. The innings you were just privileged to witness merely underscores that. But I suppose the question is whether or not he is still good enough to make his selection practically compulsory ? Having regard to age , fitness issues , and arguably a recent falling off in consistency , I'd suggest that is not quite so obvious...
Incidentally : it does seem he did indeed "marshall the tail" rather well in this innings. Which is interesting ; because one of the things that annoyed me in Australia in 2013 was that he made virtually no effort to do so. Symptom of disconnection ?

From all accounts he does seem to be happily settled at Surrey . Perhaps because he isn't there all that often ? Strike that , was a joke really ...but it is somewhat at odds with his past record in more than one place , is it not ? Perhaps the "last chance " thing is apposite ...or perhaps it is a sign of growing maturity.

Point three is the hard one for me. I was surprised when Graves stuck his oar in ( but then I was surprised when KP was defenestrated in the first place !) ... But to be honest I was even more surprised he actually did go to such trouble to take him up on his offer.  Having done that , I agree it must have been galling to be put off again.( Not that I would have been rushing to pick him ; but I'd have preferred not to have seen him blanked for the while summer in advance)

Thing is though (and here I'm feeling awkward about trying to see this from all angles and coming across as totally indecisive ) : Graves was able to fly a kite without much in the way of consequences  - and without access to much direct knowledge of all the background. Strauss , though , was at the centre of it all ; and is directly responsible for what goes on from here : he has much more to lose if his decisions bring harm rather than gain for England. And whatever sympathy one might have for Pietersen , it is surely England's interest that must come first , would you not agree ?
I am quite sure Strauss has made his decision from a belief that this is best for the team : suggestions that he is just victimizing KP out of spite are ludicrous , in my opinion  - though if there is some subconscious bias working in there , is it so surprising ? And who should we blame for that ?
The ECB clearly messed up the whole thing 16 months ago . But we can't undo that now.  I think "unbanning" him is a step in the right direction ; but I'd have preferred to have had him left with at least the possibility of selection later in the summer. Presume Strauss doesn't fancy the risk of a KP return during the Ashes so elected to rule it out from the off. He was quite candid that it was a "Trust" issue ; and that even after the summer he could offer no guarantee things would change. One could say he at least has not led KP any further up the garden path...perhaps it is a pity he didn't have charge of things in early 2014...

I do have some sympathy for KP . But I can be a bit ruthless when it comes to team versus individual ; so I am staying on the "sorry , mate , but that's how it is " side of the issue.

Thanks, Alfie. Just a few responses:

* I was keen to state in my earlier that Pietersen's triple ton proved he - at least as a batsman - was worthy of consideration for a place in the team. Even ignoring personality type issues, I was keen to avoid saying that he should automatically be in the team.

* Pietersen was incredibly connected and involved with the Surrey tail. To the extent of making Curran check his guard and talking to both him and Dunn as to how best play certain shots. Yes, I think there was something of a selfish element here. Pietersen probably wanted as many runs for his England ambitions (as he saw them at the time) as much as for his county side.

* I understand he is happy at Surrey and with the players there although I am realistic enough to understand that it is/was a means (a fairly pleasant means for him) to a more important end. Once the termination of Pietersen's Test career is confirmed to Pietersen's own satisfaction (and it may already have been), it is expected that he will be off to play in far more lucrative t20 tournaments overseas. [Additional PM being sent to you.] You are right that his games - certainly CC ones - with Surrey have been very limited in number, his central contract of course being a significant part of the reason.

* I agree that England's interest should come first. However, I feel it is very difficult for England's interest to come out on top when so many of England's supporters and the cricket watching rest of the world (which certainly includes msp) feel once again so badly let down by the ECB's actions and failures to explain.

Guildford, is there a chance that Pietersen will bat again in the ongoing CC game? Is there a link to watch/listen to the game?
Which other England player has created such cricket world wide interest in a county game in recent times by the way?

No worries! Every time it is re-confirmed that KP is still not playing for England, I will be back on to stoke the fire!

VTR wrote:No worries! Every time it is re-confirmed that KP is still not playing for England, I will be back on to stoke the fire!

And every time he scores a run a ball 30 or so, especially if England's batsmen are going through a phase of slow accumulation.

I have made my opinion known on here (not popular with all) but I hope people don't feel I am backing the way the ECB handle things. Utter ineptitude on various levels and how the hell is a sleazeball like Piers Morgan party to what should be confidential stuff?

The Loaded Dog wrote:As an aside, Guildford, do you think there will be result today? Leics with a 132 run lead and 7 down. It's the last day is it not?

Hi LD - yes, it is the last day. I do think we'll win although it seems it will go down to the wire (I'm not there today). Tremlett got injured last night (no surprise there if you remember any of my old ''England in Aus'' posts!) and isn't bowling today. That's a major blow. However, we only have 2 more wickets to take now and have the firepower (Sanga, Davies, Roy, someone else) to chase down a total in short time. Furthermore, we really have to win today after 2 slightly disappointing draws and so will definitely be going all out for it.

dummy_half wrote:

VTR wrote:No worries! Every time it is re-confirmed that KP is still not playing for England, I will be back on to stoke the fire!

And every time he scores a run a ball 30 or so, especially if England's batsmen are going through a phase of slow accumulation.

Good point, especially if its in the IPL on the same day England are batting in a Test match!

guildfordbat wrote:

msp83 wrote:Exactly which rule says that criticizing your employer on social media is a sackable offense?

Msp - my post to Raf on this thread earlier today comments to some extent on the employment law position. Worth noting that Pietersen (astutely) made sure he had no employer when the book came out.

From a practical viewpoint though, it can't be denied that the book has greatly contributed to Pietersen's treatment by the ECB and own sense of harm. This then gets us back on the recurring wheel of the book would never have been published if (1) Downton hadn't binned him in the first place and (2) Graves or someone similar had spoken earlier.

Slight liberties taken with the choice of bold, but that, in effect is the problem, I fancy. For me anyway.  Given the Textgate (done while in the team), and the biography (done while publicly stating he wants to get back in the team), is it really fanciful to wonder why a trust issue with KP is pertinent? I am sure that if he was averaging 50 and caning runs it could be swept under the carpet, but when the lad is not scoring, and is showing a propensity to reveal inner sanctum squabbles, both when in the sanctum... and trying to get back in... hardly the actions of a trusted man.

It has to be remembered that in the aftermath of Textgate, Strauss retired, and KP was integrated. Hardly seems realistic that the same people who brought him back because they needed him simultaneously decided that he was excess to requirements. KP may be a good teammate, but there is no doubt that he can be a rotten one as well. "I told Flower, James Taylor was more suited to jockeying like his dad". I am not even an English fan, or a James Taylor fan, but given the fact that they could to this day still end up teammates, and that Taylor was really just a bitpart player not much shorter than Tendulkar... it struck me as rather vile, almost guaranteed to draw unnecessary sledges on Taylo, and in essence needless.

LondonTiger wrote:Graves was dumb to open his mouth. Did Pietersen then speak to anyone to clarify things before re-signing?

This is what cricinfo reports.
Kevin Pietersen has said he is "absolutely devastated" after being told he will not be able to resume his England career. Writing in his Telegraph column, Pietersen said he had not expected such a final decision after being asked to meet with Andrew Strauss and Tom Harrison on Monday evening and suggested he had been misled by Colin Graves, the ECB's incoming chairman.

"I went into the meeting expecting Strauss to say that England's batting order is good at the moment but if I continued to score runs and if an injury occurred then I would be in contention to play," he wrote. "I would naturally have to earn my recall, but at least I would be eligible. But no. Quite simply, I feel deeply misled. Tom has tried to say that Colin Graves was misrepresented by the media when he said there was a way back for me.

"I'm afraid, as everyone can clearly see, this is the biggest load of rubbish. I had two phone conversations with Colin Graves and he was crystal clear in saying I had to get a county, score runs and that there was a clean slate. He said that when he comes in as chairman he wants the best players playing for England. He told me that on the phone in two separate conversations. He also repeated it to national newspapers.

"I have done everything I can. Was I lied to by the chairman? Only he can answer that. Tom Harrison and Andrew Strauss have said today that all three of them are united in this decision, so I don't know what to think."

msp83 wrote:Guildford, is there a chance that Pietersen will bat again in the ongoing CC game? Is there a link to watch/listen to the game?
Which other England player has created such cricket world wide interest in a county game in recent times by the way?

Msp - yes, he'll bat if necessary. I suspect he would prefer not to - many feel this will be his last match for Surrey and that a final innings of 355 not out would be the best way of bowing out.

I'm sure there is no televised live tv link. In the UK at least, you can see brief highlights of his triple ton on Surrey tv (a stationary camera so not great viewing) - just google ''Surrey CCC news'' and you should hopefully find it together with interviews.

I don't know if you'll be able to get it but there is radio commentary on BBC London - try googling that with the names of the two teams.

The answer to your last question is no one but I'm sure you knew that.

guildfordbat wrote:

msp83 wrote:Guildford, is there a chance that Pietersen will bat again in the ongoing CC game? Is there a link to watch/listen to the game?
Which other England player has created such cricket world wide interest in a county game in recent times by the way?

The answer to your last question is no one but I'm sure you knew that.

Most players quietly get on with their business, without announcing their every movement in the press/on Twitter etc..

VTR - I have no liking for Pietersen's self promotion and even less for that conducted on his behalf by the likes of Morgan and Smith. However, my own interest relates to his huge talent with the willow and I don't believe anyone could fairly deny that.

With reference to Pietersen's runs on Monday, the BBC London radio commentator Johnny Barran said, ''Anything that shines the spotlight on the county game has to be good''. Taking into account that Barran knew nothing of the circus that was to follow (and nor could he have foreseen it), I think those words were very fair and appropriate.

Fair point re the County game. The thing is, global superstars are a rare thing whether they be English, Aussie, Indian and so on. I can only really think of Botham, Flintoff, Pietersen in my time watching England that fit into that category.

So I don't think msp's question is a valid one to be honest

VTR, the point is just that, that Pietersen is a global superstar...... And as your list itself suggests, they don't come easy....... Flintoff and KP from the time I have been following England, and Botham I would agree with.......
There were comments about why 'Indians' are so concerned about Pietersen on these boards, think basically its been English, a few Indians, a few South Africans and a few Australians who are over here, and I believe a majority of people who seriously follow the game across nationalities would like to see Pietersen in international cricket or at least some credible explanation as to why such a 'global superstar' has to be kept out.

Cracking start to the job by Graves then.