SIGN UP

Kevin Pietersen - England Career Over?

Avatar Image
ChillDoubt | 19:18 Tue 04th Feb 2014 | Sport
20 Answers
Just announced on Sky that KP has not been selected for the T20 World Cup nor the tour to the West Indies.
Suggestions are that he is too much of an unsettling influence in the dressing room.
My own thoughts are that he should never have been selected for England duty ever again after the Strauss/texting debacle.
Excellent servant though he has been he obviously has a propensity for rubbing up his team mates the wrong way and divides the dressing room.

Answers

1 to 20 of 20rss feed

Avatar Image
I'm with you ChillDoubt. He has managed to isolate himself wherever he goes. South Africa, every English County he has been associated with, and of course, his abysmal behaviour over the Strauss business. good riddance and not before time - by a long chalk.
19:36 Tue 04th Feb 2014
people in the dressing room need to grow up. We've all had to work with people we don't like. Most of us cope.

The T20 team have just been thrashed three times out of three and Pietersen wasn't even there.

When he was there, in the Ashes, he was the top scorer.
-- answer removed --
It seems like he'll end up being made a scapegoat. I just don't get how you can exclude your best cricketer, or certainly one of them, given the mess things are. Can he really be dragging the team down that much? I'm not sure I understand that. Cricket may be a team game, but each ball is, for a split second, batsman v. bowler -- and so individual performances count. To say that it's somehow KP's fault for disrupting the dressing room, well, I don't know if I'll ever be able to understand why that could be the case.

Oh well. An impressive career presumably on its way to the end, and perhaps in any transition from old to new, KP would have been among the first to go.
Question Author
Unfortunately, his ego has always matched his talent. If he had been able to reel it in a little he'd have been even better and not isolated people and their opinions of him.
Tales abound of his disruptive influence, his division of the dressing room, alienation of colleagues etc.
Prior to his disgraceful behaviour over Strauss, let's not forget how he finished the coaching career of Peter Moores too.
Mercurial at his batting best but never really produced it when the chips were down, when a senior player was needed to drop anchor and marshall the tail he would be looking for the Hollywood shot.
It would appear that after a meeting with Alistair Cook and other senior figures, they have had enough.
damned if you do and damned if you don't on this one Chill -there's tumbleweed blowing through the batting order regardless and it's going to be a horribly long haul back to a decent side
I'm a big Pietersen fan. I am upset that England have left out their best batsman. Ok, he might be tough to get on with, but so what?
People talk about him being a showpony, but he's allowed to be with his talent.
Does he really divide the dressing room? Are there pro- and anti-Pietersen camps? I can't believe that.
I love watching him bat. His switch-hitting, for example, is great to watch and I think the selectors have made a big mistake. It is a shame.
Just been announced that he won't play for England again.
Question Author
Does he really divide the dressing room? Are there pro- and anti-Pietersen camps? I can't believe that.
-------------------------
I've absolutely no doubt it'll all come out in the wash.
The way he treated Strauss is just the tip of the iceberg IMHO.
When there's autobiographies to be written and copy sold, tales will abound.
let's not forget how he finished the coaching career of Peter Moores

Let's go through that bit by bit.

When captain, he was asked by the board - his employers - to tell them what he wanted for England's future.

He complied, in confidence.

Someone in the board leaked this to the media.

So his captaincy was ended - stabbed in the back by someone among his employers. Stangely, nobody has ever tried to find out who.

Moores is still coaching; his career has not been ended. The person who sawed Pietersen off is presumably still there.

Only Pietersen lost his job; and somehow the fact that he did as the board asked him is being held against him.
I think he's put in far more match-saving performances than you give him credit for: most notably his 158 at the Oval that was the difference between a loss and a draw in the 2005 Ashes, but also:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/474472.html

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/534226.html

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/361051.html

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/225265.html

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/258468.html

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/300444.html

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/566934.html

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/352664.html

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/296912.html

There are surely a few more innings out there when KP was the only England batsman to stand up and be counted -- he was a class player, one of England's best, and they will surely miss him.
Question Author
I meant Moores has never coached again internationally after losing his job because of Pietersen.
He has stayed on the scene as a selector though.
Jim, watching him biff the covers off Steyn was one of my greatest delights in the past decade. So they think, er, Lumb or someone will do that instead?
Getting rid of your arguably best player...........not a good move.
Yes, he may come with baggage, but on his day can be a match winner.
Question Author
I'm not exactly wanting to defend an obnoxious little so-and-so... I just can't understand why it can be so disruptive as people are claiming, and why given a better test record than all England batsmen other than Cook it's not worth putting up with it? Never mind his one-day efforts, which I didn't look into.

Time alone will tell, but I think this is an example of a cricket team shooting itself in the foot.
No jim, you certainly can't argue with the numbers or that he's been a game-changer

What I do find strange is that a "mangement team" of what, twenty - excluding the personal menu composers and nail technicians - can't adequately either motivate an awkward get or hold a senior player to account. If anything the ECB's in worse shape than the team.

Question Author
Fairly insightful summary by Aggers:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/26041878
Not to worry, they're beating world class players off with sticks down at cricket central.
A veritable glut of star performers, a match for any team.
Any team I tell ya.
'My own thoughts are that he should never have been selected for England duty ever again after the Strauss/texting debacle.'

Agree but he should never have played for England in the first place because he's South African

Born in a country, play for that country........whoever decided it was a good idea to let people CHOOSE what country they want to represent???
It's a narrow view of nationality to restrict it to where you are born. Who your parents are, and where you live, should be just as important. Wasn't it one of those stalwart Englishmen, the Duke of Wellington, who was born in Ireland? And then promptly came up with the quote that "being born in a stable does not make one a horse." Well, he was being a bit rude, but the point is still somewhat sound. KP is South African, but by virtue of his English mother he is also English.

1 to 20 of 20rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Kevin Pietersen - England Career Over?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.