Kevin Pietersen was told this week by new English Cricket Director Andrew Strauss that he would not play for the English side.
And KP definitely has the right to be a little annoyed with the situation.
The man turned down a lucrative IPL contract for one reason, to play county cricket. Why did he want to play county cricket? Because the ECB told him if he scored runs they would reconsider him for the upcoming Ashes series starting in July.
Here we are in May with Kevin Pietersen on his way to India to finally play in the IPL because according to the ECB, scores of 170 and 355* with an average of 212.33 for the season so far aren’t good enough to get him selected for England this summer.
Cricket for me has always been a sport where you get selected if you make runs or take wickets, but it doesn’t seem to work like that.
From club cricket to international cricket, we have people on boards ignoring an individual simply because they don’t like him. Seems pretty childish doesn’t it?
Kevin Pietersen shouldn’t be dropped just because certain individuals on the board don’t like him – he should be dropped because he’s not good enough. And there isn’t one individual out there who doubts his ability.
The fact that the ECB have ignored Kevin Pietersen suggests that they aren’t picking the best XI for the country,they are simply picking who they believe won’t be able to overpower the ECB or even question them.
What more can Kevin Pietersen do? He’s just scored 355* for Surrey and here we are discussing other ways he might be able to rejoin the England side.
Yes Kevin Pietersen may of wrote an autobiography not so long ago which included attacks on people, but so did Graeme Swann and his book was arguably just as dramatic and it was published during his time as an employed English cricketer. You get the feeling there’s a set of rules for Pietersen, but no one else.
To sum up how childish some of the English cricketers were during Pietersen’s time as an England cricketer, they began a Twitter page which mocked Pietersen.
There’s no denying that page was made by the older members of the squad. I’m sure if you asked the younger players they would love Kevin Pietersen back in the fold. The experience he would offer and the advice would be second to none in terms of what English cricket can offer.
Kevin Pietersen was and still is England’s most exciting batsmen to watch. The fact that he is in great form and is available for selection and the board has ignored him is just utterly ridiculous.
I’m sure if you sat down Mitchell Johnson, Mitchell Starc, Ryan Harris, Nathan Lyon and so on and asked them who they would like to avoid bowling to in the upcoming Ashes series, the answer would be Kevin Pietersen.
Some of the top sportsmen have come out and supported Pietersen and made it clear on what they think of the ECB and Andrew Strauss.
Andrew Strauss doesn’t care what the English cricket fans want, he’s only bothered about himself and no one else. If I’m being honest, Michael Vaughan should have been appointed instead of Andrew Strauss. He is someone who knows where the issues are in English cricket.
I’m an Australian, but I want to see the best cricketers playing worldwide and I want this Ashes series to be a contest. I can see Australia demolishing this English side without Kevin Pietersen.
For English cricket to move forward they need new names at the top so they can begin the rebuilding process.
Bearfax
Guest
I'm wanting the UK to put their best side on the park Rich, not to pick and choose because you like this one but not that one. I fail to see that that is an illogical statement. Perhaps you should offer your argument instead of just expressing a put down.
Rich_UK
Guest
If you allow personal issues to cloud your judgement, you most definitely should not be in the job. Strauss, you may have been a fine cricketer but you are way out of your depth in your present role. Quit before embarrassment finds you out. Oh dear oh dear oh dear
Bearfax
Guest
I'm amazed at the childishness of this behaviour. I remember being placed in a position of some authority and was asked to look at the potential of aspirants, one of which was this person I didnt much like. Personally she was not someone I felt at all good about but I recognised her abilities. I examined the options and she offered the most for the job so selected her without question. In business, and cricket is a business, you pick who ever is likely to offer the business the best outcomes. Personal issues have no place in that arena. If you allow personal issues to cloud your judgement, you most definitely should not be in the job. Strauss, you may have been a fine cricketer but you are way out of your depth in your present role. Quit before embarrassment finds you out.
Jack Smith
Roar Guru
They are doing a disservice to England cricket fans. - you know the people who the game is run for. Four of 5 different polls I have seen on English news websites, about 86-87% want him in each with over 10 000k+ votes.
Al
Guest
"I’m sure if you sat down Mitchell Johnson, Mitchell Starc, Ryan Harris, Nathan Lyon and so on and asked them who they would like to avoid bowling to in the upcoming Ashes series, the answer would be Kevin Pietersen." And in that, you have the essence of competition - do what you're opponent wants you to not do. But, in saying that, do you move Balance up? Or drop one of Bell/Root/Balance? England's issues run deeper than not having KP on the team - too many middle-order batsmen, not enough top order batsmen, subpar second/third/fourth/fifth bowling options. Looks like the closest Ashes series in years, considering how badly we've traveled recently.
Dasilva
Guest
I do agree this was mismanaged. While I don't know whether he should be selected in the first xi. He definitely should have been a back up player in case of injuries or loss of form Also an interesting blog regarding Pietersen time in england and whatever flaws Pietersen has I don't think he had the most conducive environment. http://www.thefulltoss.com/england-cricket-blog/inside-the-turtle-tank/