Comments for en-gb 30 Sun 19 Apr 2015 14:26:00 GMT+1 A feed of user comments from the page found at thrifty5000 Actually Karlgbrown, none of what you have said has anything to do with my arguments at all, particularly your references to rose-tinted spectacles and the "the golden age of English cricket". That's why I mentioned Hussain. But I do agree with you that KP is good enough to play for England. Wed 14 Jan 2009 06:55:50 GMT+1 drunkmonk69 Still early days in KPs career. So far he has been good but people speak like he is a legend. Time will tell. He is not going anywhere. He is not wanted in South Africa and England gives him the attention and adoration he craves. He might not be happy now but that will change. He will score runs and act arrogantly (some say competitively ) and everyone will love him.I personally don't think much of his character. I would rather have a humble captain who has a sense of tact and diplomacy than a maverick who acts like an only spoilt child. Tue 13 Jan 2009 17:31:19 GMT+1 karlgbrown In response to comment 73, I wouldn't have bothered writing that lot mate. Its rubbish. Your argument is that, although Pietersen scores more runs more regularly than any of the English players you listed that he isn't as good. He's more consistent but because he hasn't signle handedly won a test yet he isn't as good. Isn't cricket a team game? Yeah that makes perfect sense. And Mike Gatting?! Give Pietersen some credit. you talk about Pietersen being overrated, well Gatting fits that bill perfectly. Michael Atherton, who I admit was a very good opener, was in Glenn McGrath's back pocket every time England played Australia and I have yet to see any bowler really dominate Pietersen over a whole series. I'm not even going to debate Nasser Hussain. In reference to your comment "picking players just because they happen to be the best in the world won't get you far in the long run", what does that mean? So picking the best players in the world won't help a team to succeed, but if mediocre players were picked then England would do better?!! By that rationale Man Utd could sell Ronaldo and pick up some duffer from the Blue Square Premier and still win the league! At the end of the day, Pietersen is better than any other current batsman who is eligible to play for England so he's here to stay. You can wear your rose tinted spectacles and look back to the 'golden age' of English cricket of the 70s, 80s and early 90s when we got thumped by just about everyone and say that KP isn't as good as Tony Greig or Graham Gooch or Robin Smith or anyone else you care to name, but none of them are as consistent run scorers as Pietersen. Stats are facts. Tue 13 Jan 2009 17:12:41 GMT+1 thrifty5000 To karlgbrown.If I had checked the stats you've just quoted, they would have told me what we all already know - that Kevin Pietersen is good enough to play for England.Other than that, they are irrelevant because they dont tell anyone whether or not Kevin Pietersen is a player that can deliver the scores that matter, either by himself or with a partner, that help England win (on a regular basis) the matches that matter against the teams that matter. The right stats are useful, but use your eyes and your common sense, look at what happened in the matches that matter against the teams that matter and check again whether the stats justify giving Pietersen blank cheque after blank cheque. Look for example at his conversions, his ability to convert good scores into big scores and really big scores when the chances are there to do so. Those stats told against Bell and they tell against him. The stats you like tell you that there is no problem. My eyes and my common sense tell me something else.Picking players just because they happen to be the best in the world wont get you very far in the long run. If you want to be the best in the world on paper, then pick Pietersen. But if you need to pick those players who are best at delivering you a win (which is the only "best" that counts), then Kevin Pietersen is no Smith, no Greig, no Ponting, no Gooch, no Gatting, no Atherton, no Hussain.We all know that Pietersen isnt the only one who needs to look at what they are doing. We all know about the (ex-)coach's shortcomings at the highest level, that the bowling isnt operating at the level it was 3½ years ago, that the top order are out of form and out of touch with each other, that the middle order has a soft underbelly that other (better) teams keep finding with monotonous regularity. We should also realise that its not all to do with the Board. So why pick on him (you might say)? Why not (you might say) leave him alone and deal with all the other factors behind our inability to win or avoid losing the matches that matter against the teams that matter?Other people will have other views. My view is that (1) Pietersen's tactics are so reflective of the lack of discipline and application to the job of winning that is turning potential wins into draws and draws into defeats, and worse than that, and (2) they are so fixable. If I was being hyped at the expense of a losing team I would be embarrassed for the team and for myself, but then I am no KP. The hype is there to distract you, to divert your eyes and dull your sense and your instincts to what is really going on. Dont trust it. save it for a winner in a winning team. Tue 13 Jan 2009 07:10:37 GMT+1 karlgbrown To No. 69, I refer to your comparison of Pietersen with Graeme Smith:"I could not care less that Pietersen is one of England's highest averaging players, he's no Graham Smith and his record (despite all the hype, all the publicity, all the hoopla) shows that he is not as good a player as Graham Smith. Graham Smith gets the job done while Pietersen makes flashy fifties, bails out out before the job is done and leaves it up to the rest of the team to finish the job that he should have done for them if he really was all that everyone says he is."Pietersen does not just make flash fifties before bailing out. He has 15 centuries already in only 45 tests. Graeme Smith has only managed 18 in 74 tests so that stat would indicate that Pietersen makes centuries more regularly than Smith. Their batting average is very similar; Smith averages 51 and Pietersen 50. Also, there are only a handful of English players in the history of test cricket who have scored 4000+ runs at an average of over 50 so Pietersen is in very exclusive company along with the likes of Herbert Sutcliffe, Jack Hobbs, Walter Hammond, Len Hutton and Denis Compton. Firstly you should check your stats before commenting and secondly, maybe you should start believing the hype about KP. None of the other current England batsmen have a record which compares to his. Mon 12 Jan 2009 12:32:16 GMT+1 AussieBrendo I believe KP shot himself in the foot! The ECB were under pressure because Moores obviously wasn't the man for the job and the up and down performance of the team was as much a coach problem as it was out of form players and player resentment of Moores himself. If KP had waited the coach problem would have sorted it's self. The proud men behind the scenes hate being seen as making wrong decisions as was the choice of Moores. The ECB should stop trying to captain the team from the sidelines and back their Captains. As for the choice of captaincy the best tactition is sitting on the sidelines in Vaughan, forget his batting, England require a stable leader that the team know and trust without a coach trying to be the top man. England woul dhave beaten India had Vaughan been in charge. Moores in my view isn't up to standard as a international coach and did nothing but assist in Vaughan's downfall and KP's. Mon 12 Jan 2009 01:48:39 GMT+1 Paddy Briggs Somebody's telling Porkies here - and my guess is that it is not KP. His interview in the NOW today says categorically that he had the support of Freddie and Harmy - who had previously been reported as not backing him.My guess is that the question that the ECB asked the players was "Do you want Moores replaced as coach?" rather than "Do you want KP replaced as Captain". They assumed that if you answered NO to the first question then your answer to the second had to be YES. Not so.I think that KP had not lost the support of any of his teammates. But that did not mean that all of his teammates agreed with him over Moores. What the ineffable ECB should have done is NOTHING – until KP had returned home and they had had a review with him and Moores of the options. It is an utter failure of management and more heads need to roll – starting with Morris and Collier. Sun 11 Jan 2009 12:57:22 GMT+1 parmar16 andrew strauss new captain well i can say that he will do well in the west indies as england are a better test nation compared to the west indies but will he be able to handle the pressure come the ashes he will jus be out thought and out played by the brilliance of ponting and his men good luck strauss Sun 11 Jan 2009 12:21:31 GMT+1 thrifty5000 Time to look back and compare what was said at the time Pietersen got the job with what is happening now. Why should anyone be surprised?Lots of praise as usual for Pietersen's oh so exciting, oh so mercurial abilities, his single-mindedness, his self-confidence blah blah blah.Yet England continued to lose matches they should have won or at least drawn, continued to get found out by more disciplined opponents, continued to get beaten by teams ranked above them. And he continued to get scores that were good enough to keep him in the side but not good enough to win matches.I could not care less that Pietersen is one of England's highest averaging players, he's no Graham Smith and his record (despite all the hype, all the publicity, all the hoopla) shows that he is not as good a player as Graham Smith. Graham Smith gets the job done while Pietersen makes flashy fifties, bails out out before the job is done and leaves it up to the rest of the team to finish the job that he should have done for them if he really was all that everyone says he is.The more Pietersen has been given his head the more divided, the less disciplined and the worse England have become in the matches that matter.As for the management, I am not going to kick them while they are down. These are experienced, well-meaning and capable people. I have no major grudge against them. I do think they lack the courage of their convictions, are too concerned with appearances (just add as an example their failing to sack Flintoff straightaway after England had lost the 2nd Test in Australia to their failing to handle what's going on now) and dont believe in the relationship between a player's performance on the ground and his place in the team.Yes they made mistakes and yes they have made some mediocre appointments, but none of that as been as damaging as the lack of disciple on the pitch and the lack of bottle in the boardroom.There are lots of problems, but many if not all of them are fixable if they start really believing in the ultimate aim of producing and supporting a team that (whatever its membership) will do what is required to win and not do any of those things that have caused it to lose the matches that matter over the last three and a half years. Sun 11 Jan 2009 09:14:34 GMT+1 Toe2Toe MihrThank you for your post.Cricket is a team sport and no man is ever bigger than the side.Pietersen is undoubtly a good batsman who was the hunger to win. A true asset to any side and I would like to see more England player with that attitude not just in cricket but in football as well.In my opinion, trying to force through his mindset on fellow team members and coaching staff has been met with resistance. Some will perceive it as arrogance and some people just fear change too much to move.I would point to another South African who is on the verge of taking his country to the top of Test cricket, Graham Smith. He has the same hunger and determination for success and he has harnessed the skills and attributes of his team magnificently.He recognises that cricket is indeed a team sport.In closing, I hope that Pietersen is big enough to, on reflection, admit his mistakes and change for the better. Sat 10 Jan 2009 10:53:37 GMT+1 twentyhours I have read quite a bit today but that new man writing in postal jourmal daily called Paul seems to know where his bread his buttered. KP Top Gun I wonder what he means. Clearly there his someone who needs to protect an image. The ECB have a few questions to answer on timings etc but really can we have a National team run by the press , selection and strategy even tatics govened by those with papers to sell? Fri 09 Jan 2009 22:48:58 GMT+1 AntonfromLancs Not a disaster at all provided we are able to use the Caribbean tour to gel. Strauss is a decent captain, Pietersen will still be batting, and we shall have got rid of David Moores.Why am I glad to have dumped Moores? I'm not judging him by results, because results depend partly on things he has no control over - the opposition, and the basic talent pool available to him. But, under Moores, the batting of Bell, Collingwood and Flintoff has gone backwards, likewise the bowling of Harmison; and Cook, Broad and Panesar are not fulfilling their considerable promise. We are better off without Moores, but we must find a good replacement. Fri 09 Jan 2009 21:51:07 GMT+1 manukv Politics of this entire episode aside, I would have thought that what ECB desperately wants is the team’s success. Which is what I think Pietersen wanted and was probably single minded about it. Is there anything wrong about it?It does seem from the reports, he may have talked about these issues with ECB before he was handed the captaincy with promises to deliver... The question is, if he did express what he wants for his success, has ECB (and/or) the coach delivered on those promises?Otherwise, I don't see why he would have wanted to go public, though a bit impatiently.It reminds me of Saurav Ganguly's style of captaincy. I would probably think that Pietersen shares the single mindedness, self esteem and task master kind of attributes that Saurav had.Saurav was a successful captain and is credited with the new aggressive, "go-getter" attitude that the Indian team developed. He succeeded at a significant personal cost, including his bruised relationship with the cricket establishment. He was that kind of a guy - an intense, impatient and aggressive chap.You sometimes need such captains to charge up the team and get that hunger to win matches.ECB should have known about Pietersen's traits. If they didn't know what kind of leader Pietersen would make, what are they doing then? They have set him up for failure right from the start? Did they choose him as a captain just based his personal brilliance!!!Mihir is right... we need to know Pietersen's side of story. We may not know immediately, since he still has a career to handle.Good luck Kevin... you still are a star. We would definitely want to see you play your wonderful game of cricket. Fri 09 Jan 2009 21:46:23 GMT+1 NickyRees I find it a great shame that England have lost a top coach and motivational leader in Peter Moores. His record at Sussex proved this and the players that played under him there were made to bring out their best.I've just read Tony Cottey's biography and this gives an excellent insight into how Peter Moores operated as a coach and man manager, developing players to their full potential and taking an integral role in building a superb team spirit.England's loss I feel. Fri 09 Jan 2009 21:27:46 GMT+1 akaMattyBoy123 Hmmm...The ECB sacked a player because they didn't want someone who wanted some control over his team, or to seem to undermine them in some way. Pietersen wanted things his way...rightly so - he is one of few who always plays with pride. Moores had to go, his record is pretty terrible - when did we record a significant series win with Moores at the helm? We didn't. For the people who have claimed that KP has belonged to South Africa - that is completely wrong. He is our best, most consistent batsman. He is ruthless and plays with pride that not many other England players play with.He must continue to play for England otherwise we do not stand a chance in The Ashes.As for Strauss, he will be a fine captain as he was in 2006, and maybe it will work out positivcely. Fri 09 Jan 2009 20:51:11 GMT+1 karlgbrown Fair play to KP. While he may not have handled the whole situation as diplomatically as he could have, he has shown the ECB in its true colours; clueless and ineffective. His actions also served to get rid of a head coach who had an average record and seemed to be out of his depth. People have slated Pietersen for being arrogant, egotistical or self-centred, but I admire him for not being pushed around by the ECB old boy network and for sticking to his guns. He was obviously not happy with the England set up and as England captain he had every right to voice his concerns. An ultimatum may have been over the top, but it would probably take something of that magnitude to get the ECB to act. I personally think Pietersen has many of the traits of a good captain; single-minded, uncompromising and above all motivated with a will to win, so I am sorry that his captaincy has come to a premature end.Apparently KP lost the backing of some of the squad as a result of his actions, so it would seem that the ECB paid more attention to what other players were saying rather than the captain. KP has been criticised for speaking of his problems with Peter Moores, but then the ECB go running around canvassing the other players for their opinions and looking for criticism of the captain. And why should the other players have a say on the topic anyway? They should be concentrating more on their own performances rather than what’s going on in the corridors of power. Flintoff, for example, has done nothing for England since the Ashes in 2005, except getting drunk during the World Cup and falling out of a pedalo and captaining England to a 5-0 drubbing in Australia. He has hardly been a shining light for English cricket in recent years, so why are his views of the situation so important to the governing body? I just hope that Pietersen doesn’t decide to turn his back on England as it would be an irreplaceable loss. He is the best player in the England set up by some way. He is an amazingly gifted and exciting player and is one of the best batsmen in the world. Not many English players spring to mind who have scored over 4000 test runs at an average of 50 and have scored 15 centuries in 45 matches. Take him out of the team and England’s batting order looks as rigid as soggy cardboard. While he may have made mistakes during this affair I think the media have been far too harsh on him, considering that he has yet to really comment on the subject. The ECB also need to take a portion of the blame as their management of the problem was laughable. English cricket needs Pietersen, so the ECB better build some bridges quickly to at least ensure that he is still part of the team. And one final comment to a minority of bloggers who said that Pietersen should not play for England because he is South African. Firstly, you’re in the wrong century. Your racist and jingoistic attitudes are slightly out of date. Secondly, Pietersen’s mother is English so he’s more English than the royal family and thirdly he has shown a lot more grit and pride when playing for England than many ‘native’ players. Maybe we should berate these players for not playing with more pride and determination when chosen to represent their country and praise Pietersen for his commitment to England. Fri 09 Jan 2009 17:37:39 GMT+1 Questionofsportgeek Everything you've said here Mihir fits the bill and is a good summing upIts a shame that English sport in general seems to not be able to last a year without a serious sporting debacle. The FA, ECB, RFU...each society supposedly running an international team seem to have the management skills that would be frowned upon in a local club setting rather than international class. Management swaps, player debacles, issues. England must be the laughing stock of the world at the moment. If any of these societies have any pride in their country they'll take their arrogance away and put proper management teams together. Teams that can handle the likes of David Beckham, Andy Murray, Kevin Pietersen and Danny Cipriani. They need support with their names in the limelight so much of the time. They need to put their faith in someone rather than quitting at the first hurdle, this whole mess could have been avoided at the start. Its time each board picked a coach and a captain that can stick and be trusted in. Whats the point in picking mediocre coaches and captains doomed to fail before they can assert any domination. I have a lot of admiration and I love to see Andrew Strauss playing well but it seems as if in a couple of bad innings time we're going to have a lot of problems on our hands again. Its in their hands. Fri 09 Jan 2009 17:28:42 GMT+1 sipa99 Agree completely with #59. Terms like Ruthless, aggressive, driven, arrogant, win at all costs are just not part of the English vocabulary (pun intended). The English team focuses on team players, do not rock the boat, do your best, better to be mediocre and nice than brilliant and arrogantThe demise of English cricket will continue. Look to the Windies to whip them and then the Ausies to humilate them. Fri 09 Jan 2009 16:36:38 GMT+1 BJW2009 Im sorry but English cricket in general, be it the ECB, the players or `just the english `style` of playing can be summed up by the following words; Dogged, Tight, Restricted, Stiff, Unimaginative,Indecisive,Weak,Reserved,typically british, Dull, Political...Australian or South Africa are typified by; Ruthless, Aggressive, Committed,Focused,Driven,Massively Talented,Supported,Desire,Passion, Will not lose attitude, Confident, Explosive,Swash Buckling, Arrogant.....the list goes on...For example when you get the first 5 or 6 England wickets down, simply add about another 50 runs and that will be their final score. Australia ... well, with Lee, Johnson, Haurittz, Siddle, almost all their bowlers are capable of adding 100-150 between them. Thats one of the main differences. Even if the top order fails, they will simply NOT be allowed to be skittled out cheaply, someone stands up. I foresee another England whitewash in the Ashes....the Aussies will be laughing at another typical England mess... Its true there is something about `English Sport` & `Management` that results in a complete meltdown... Fri 09 Jan 2009 13:45:17 GMT+1 firsttoface So far we have only heard snipits of what went on that led to Peter Moores' departure and Kevins' demotion into the ranks.There are further facts to emerge and matters that require further expanation.For example, were the players contacted by Hugh Morris prior to the final ECB decisions?If so, who were they and who was in what camp?I can imagine Bell, Flintoff, Collingwood, Panisar and Harmison against Kevin and the rest for Kevin. If it is that any of the players were contacted by Hugh Morris at any time in the last few days, then Hugh Morris should be sacked for management incompetance.Not only has he failed to deal with the issue at the outset when he must have known that Kevin and Peter Moores did not get on, he has failed consistently to sort it out and must have known that it would leak to the press sooner than later.To have failed this and then councilled for divisions amongst the ranks shows an abject lack of management skills of the most basic. For the part the ECB has played in all this, well they set up the route to failure in the first place. The moment you have a Coach, a Director, Chairman of Selectors and then a Captain all appointed individualy and with crossover responsibilies, and no clear mandate of who is in charge of what, ruptions will occur and problems will be created.Hugh Morris should now go as well.For the future, ECB need to appoint a new England Coach (infuenced by the now appointed Captain Strauss so they are sure they can work together) and then clear the roles of selection as reporting directly into the new coach so that the coach and the captain select the teams. Both Coach and Captain have clear and part merged roles both on and of the pitch. The ECB should also go back to the old days and appoint a Tour Manager/Tour. Fri 09 Jan 2009 13:35:12 GMT+1 onionclub9 Finally, we get the captain we should have had back in 2006!The debacle of Andrew Flintoff being made captain showed in the appointing of KP. These types of players should be left to focus their talent, skill and egos on scoring runs, getting wickets and inspiring the rest of the team, WITHOUT the burden of politics and management.I am also of the opinion that if a player/coach is picked for his country, he must give it everything to make english cricket better, despite what he may feel towards his captain or coach and find ways to work together. Therefore, the ECB should have banged KP and PM's heads together earlier. They are in charge not the players or the coach. C'MON ECB LETS HAVE SOME BALLS FROM YOU! Its english cricket you represent to the world! Fri 09 Jan 2009 13:06:26 GMT+1 batandballPaul I think the management have shown themselves to be not as effective as we were supposed to believe but I think the players (and they are after all are the ones who count) could and should come out of this with a new focus on the thing that really matters and that is playing cricket.Although the news story is sensational and therefore good column it should have little effect on the cricket players themselves other than galvinising them and focusing their minds. After all it should not matter one iota who is captain to the individual once on the field of play so long as they take resonsibility for their own actions and performance. In short this may toughen up mentally some players and is no bad thing if it does. I think also it may give some of the younger players a chance to stand up and be counted particlarly players like Stuart Broad who have played a few tests and ODI's but have yet to really assert themselves. England have still a very good squad of players, they just need to stop blaming others for their bad performances and take responsibility for their own team and to their theam mates. Fri 09 Jan 2009 12:23:50 GMT+1 ericbee You have sent my previous message to moderation. Could you please explain what was wrong with it. No swear words are in it. I have not attacked any particular individual. Other comments seems to being made in the same vain.Please explain at [Personal details removed by Moderator] Fri 09 Jan 2009 12:19:41 GMT+1 Maddog Strauss should have been made captain in the first place, KP was always a bold choice, I was just wondering whether KP has the option of retiring from England and going back to play in South Africa and the the national team you can do it in rugby, from a financial point of view he probably wouldn't be that worse off, he could play in the IPL, would still get a lot of endorsements, he could even go and play in India? Dhoni does alright financially KP would be on a similar level? Be interested to know where KP goes from here or will he just 'slot back in' he doesn't strike me as 'slot back' kinda guy? Thoughts? Fri 09 Jan 2009 12:04:07 GMT+1 softandfluffy Mihir,Thank you for being one of the few cricket journalists to point out the failings of the ECB.In my view, this classic English farce should be blamed solely on a management not up to the job. In particular, Hugh Morris, who should now have the decency to resign over this sorry and 'unholy mess'.It was Morris who picked Moores, even though there were far better candidates at the time including an obvious choice Tom Moody, after all his success with Sri Lanka. The FA made exactly the same mistake when they chose their No.2 McClaren. And look what happened! A case of 'jobs for the boys.'I've been a Sussex supporter for over 20 years and was amazed when Moores was chosen as England coach. He is simply not up to the task. The present Sussex coach, Robinson, is far better, in my view.Therefore, Morris should and must resign.For as Nasser Hussein points out in the link below, the rot starts with the ECB. They only want to keep the status quo. And therefore choose unimaginative, unchallenging types, like Morris, into positions of power. The same individuals in commerce would only make it to middle-management, at best!If you are a very successful sportsman and hail from South Africa or Australia, KPs strong views and ego are more common. It is a part of their culture. And accordingly, the sport authorities understand and know how to cope with it.But this debacle occurred in Britain where the ECB are used to dealing with less ego and weaker political manoeuvre. KP is a shock to their system and they had no idea how to deal with his forthright approach. Poor old Hugh Morris, totally out of his depth;it must have felt like a battering ram had hit him! So, it is not KP immaturity, as some suggest, but a clash of culture. As the British would say, "It's just not cricket!"Anyway, the non-threatening, non-challenging, unimaginative, uninspired and new Captain Andrew 'posh' Strauss is an ideal choice to calm the waters and regain the status quo which the ECB desperately need.At this rate the entire English cricket team will be made up of former Captains. :o) Fri 09 Jan 2009 11:59:50 GMT+1 Richard James Joyce Not really much of an argument to all this Mihir, pretty much recounting events that are common knowledge. Granted you end with a short analysis of the impact on some of the key players, and it is hard to argue with your claim that "The belief that it has a management structure that can deal with issues professionally has surely been shot to pieces."However, I am not convinced that this is truly "a crisis which leaves them in tatters at the start of an Ashes year."The well aired view (well articulated by Mike Selvey in the guardian, below) that, at least on the field things might change for the better, carries some weight. has captained the side effetcively when he has had the chance, notably against Pakistan, and scored a weight of runs in the process (even his two ODI centures I believe came when skippering the side). He will also surely engineer greater dressing room unity and should have the respect of KP too. It is also widely believed that Flower was responsible for his improved playing of spin in India, suggesting he may work well with Flower in charge, whilst reports today claim Pietersen also wanted rid of Flower.Peter Moores' record was mediocre at best and he showed little sign of giving England the edge in the major series, but enough competence to see them overcome lesser opposition. It is unlikely he would have come a cropper vs. the West Indies, so would probably have gone into the Ashes as coach without a proven track record of winning the big series.At least this way, we can get a new coach in, with one (maybe two if Flower gets the job permanently) series preparation time to bed in and begin to instill his ideas in the squad before the Ashes. So long as Pietersen's batting form doesn't suffer from losing the captaincy (which, given his ego and the West Indies bowling attack, I would imagine he won't let happen), the team, far from being in tatters, could go from strength to strength under a new order, regardless of the shambles that ushered it in. Fri 09 Jan 2009 11:59:25 GMT+1 ericbee This post has been Removed Fri 09 Jan 2009 11:54:53 GMT+1 city76 It would seem that Mihir is vulnerable to some odd influences and sources here - his views seem very strongly coloured by people with interests to declare - witness his piece on BBC news last night. Why have an interview with the only person who actually owns a county club? Why wasn't that made clear at the time?The truth is that a captain with a personality combining Boycott and Botham was always going to find the wider ramifications of the modern England captaincy job difficult. Fri 09 Jan 2009 11:54:26 GMT+1 Jim Jimmeney The only thing the ECB does well is farce. Fri 09 Jan 2009 11:37:11 GMT+1 kemp777 Kp was a great Captain but AS is a lucky captain i am not a english supporter but i do think AS will do a good job Feel sorry for KP Fri 09 Jan 2009 11:18:10 GMT+1 aireyfairy The people that should really resign are the whole of the ECB and the Selectors, they by their total inability to see what was rather obvious to most of us.They appointed the wrong captain the wrong coach and have consistantly ignored "form" in many of their other selections. The ECB is a bit of a Club and since selling out for the "big bucks" to Sky (so that money can be spent on the game?" English Cricket has declined in skill and support. Fri 09 Jan 2009 11:12:48 GMT+1 sumodragon AJS was born in SA. When did he make the decision to play for England, if selected? Fri 09 Jan 2009 11:12:21 GMT+1 sumodragon 44 is being moderated so I'll try again.KP is a great player but I always felt he belonged to the South African team (tattoospermitting). I would love to see him playingalongside Smith, Kallis, Amla, Prince, Duminy,Boucher etc and striving for preeminence. Can you requalify for a/your country? Fri 09 Jan 2009 10:58:34 GMT+1 sumodragon KP shd've played his cricket for SA. Perhaps he realised early on he'd only be one of the superstars there, so better to play for England. I wish he'd go back to a country he obviously loves, and rightly so, requalify, and we could then enjoy his batting in a lineup of fellow superstars who who wouldn't put up with any ego nonsense. Fri 09 Jan 2009 10:34:45 GMT+1 Alan Excellent articleWhere does this leave Pieterson now ? Of course he has his supporters, but he has also alienated himself with the majority of players, supporters and ECB officials alike. I think it is possible that Pieterson may reflect on the events and decide to take a break from Test Cricket (I am sure his pride will be dented by revelations about lack of support from factions within the England dressing room). If he does this then IPL/ICL beckons, and then the ECB would need to take a positive stance by suspending him on the basis that he would effectively be refusing to play for his country - this outcome seems very probable. For Kevin Pieterson's sake he needs to recognise that he is incredibly naieve and start listening to someone who can advise him on a sensible way forward. He could do worse than to spend an hour with Michael Atherton who is well placed given his own experiences to both empathise with him, but also to give him advice and guidance that he has sadly lacked. I recall the bluster around his original appointment. Smiling to the cameras he said words to the effect that he would leave no stone unturned in seeking advice including leaders from industry. Had he done this, I am sure there is not a Chief Exec of any note who would have suggested that he issued what was effectively an ultimatum to the ECB. Only one loser in almost all casesGreat player that Pieterson is, he can do much more harm to the English team than good. He should either change, and fall in as one of the team, or go off and do what he wants. The problem is that I don't think he can change and he's done enough harm already Fri 09 Jan 2009 10:28:38 GMT+1 AmiyaBhattacharjee Dear Mr Bose,When Kevin Pieterson was appointed England captain, I knew we were back to Ian Botham days, when he was England's captain.The problems, arguments, results are all identical and so is the end.Amiya Bhattacharjee Fri 09 Jan 2009 10:09:44 GMT+1 eirebilly Off topic;I would also like to ask the ECB as to what measures they put in place for grooming future captains?In Australia, potential captains are identified at a young age and are sent on courses for leadership, man management and media. Why do the ECB ignore such a sound structure? By implimenting this structure they could avoid such dramas such has just unfolded. Fri 09 Jan 2009 08:11:55 GMT+1 Tufnell_fanclub It is a mess.Andrew Strauss is a good choice of captain. He should have been selected in the first place. But hindsight is a great thing!! Strauss is intelligent, media savvy and I think he'll get the players behind him even KP. Not sure Owais Shah is his biggest fan though. He made some interesting comments on 5Live last night with Mark Saggers. But hopefully, Stauss will use the mess to galvanise the team for the West Indies and Australia. Ian Healy seems to think this will happen. Yes, KP has an ego. He is driven. To be honest, he has played well for England and that should not be forgotten! When he does play for England - he plays for England. I firmly believe that. And he is crucial to England's chance of winning the Ashes.Look at some of the great players. Warne! He has an ego. He still does!! But what a player!! He did clash with Ponting in 2005. But boy!!! 2007, he was the main man behind the Australian team which kicked England into touch 5 - 0!!! Ganguly had an ego. Look what he did for India!! He was the guy who started to give India that edge. All teams need a star man!! I really hope that the ECB do learn from this mess. I really do. Hang on, I saw a pig fly by my window!! Fri 09 Jan 2009 07:59:28 GMT+1 eirebilly If the rumours are to be believed that KP didnt have the backing of the team, then how is it possible that he will play for the team with 100% commitment??Also, as much as i think that Peter Moores wasnt good enough to coach the team, i do believe that he is the only one to walk away with his dignity intact. Unlike KP and the ECB, he did not manipulate the media with damning comments.Mr Bose, i thank you for using one of my quotes Almost word for word) posted on the 606 2 days ago refering to KP. KP is a selfish egotiscal player, a trait common in champions but not in leaders. Fri 09 Jan 2009 07:52:16 GMT+1 Prophet_09 The last time England had a captain as arrogant as KP was Douglas Jardine. That ended up with England wining the Ashes before sacking the captain. Fri 09 Jan 2009 07:47:56 GMT+1 Stormjib Bad decisions have a habit of coming home to roost! The last tour of Australia was a shambles and the ECB still owes an apology to both Andrew Strauss and Chris Reid for the poor treatment they received.While it is time to move on, both KP and Peter Moores have been in the spotlight and the ECB is once again hiding from its own bad decisions and almost total lack of management ability. I look forward to some day in the future when the English contribution to management of the game might come under the control of some people with a modicum of leadership ability.The current situation is not KP's fault any more than the earlier situation was Andrew Flintoff's fault. Both are great players. The ECB continues to expect a star player rather than the best leader to automatically become an outstanding Captain. Nothing new, remember Ian Botham! The ECB leads from behind, points the blame at others and fails to take any responsibility for its own incompetence.Moving on, Andrew Strauss should be up to the task if he gets the necessary support. As a team England have underperformed and have been reluctant to draw on the depth of resources available . There is a lack of consistency in team selection...if Messrs Key, Solanki, Shah and Ramprakash had received anything like the commitment extended to Ian Bell, the current team could look rather different. No disrespect intended to Bell, he is a very good player but the others have been deserving of far more support than they have received.There are several excellent young players also ready for consideration. We need to build a squad and a policy that will give opportunity to those in form and rest the players that are out of form/need a break. If there really is competition for the places, performance will improve and so will morale.Good luck Andrew Strauss Fri 09 Jan 2009 05:58:15 GMT+1 Sevenseaman If Mihir is to be believed then it is a mob out there. Also, he has access to some very impeccable sources. Very cogent! It should be an assumption now - ECB still has some real clout, the credentials to run English cricket; seeing it came out of the shambles pretending its chastity was still intact, though with many dents.I like ECB's batting style - Poll the team behind the captain's back and safely show him the door in view of a suitable result.Choice of successor is ok, but will he be really lucky to have total committment from KP as a player. Strauss is quick to stress he has KP's backing. I am sure KP is after all a professional and will give one hundred per cent. But he wasn't very professional to give up the England captaincy so easily - and so soon. To me it was not only a matter of pride, but a matter of manifold loyalty too. Or has he been manoeuvered? Which is again not very smart of him.Now that he is gone let us not nitpick his captaincy nous. He is an outstanding player. As a captain as seen so far, no better or worse than others around him.I sicerely hope Strauss becomes a rallying point for English cricket. Fri 09 Jan 2009 04:49:21 GMT+1 manucastle KP was a failure in India, both as a captain & player. IMO, he lost confidence of his players there.You have summed up the situation very well, Mr. Bose. One of your better ones. Fri 09 Jan 2009 04:11:47 GMT+1 Rob Olivier I'd be interested in readers views on the narcarssistic and cricket parallels between Kevin Pietersen and Ted Dexter.Is pride,ego and self conviction blind and blur the reality where self and others are concerned, and the splitting off of anything deemed bad, not good enough or threatening? Fri 09 Jan 2009 01:56:06 GMT+1 archLionheart I think KP still would want to play for England, he can see an Ashes win (sometime) and would like to be part of that as it is iconic in cricket and to be part of it means you go down in history. That's the only way he can get there as he can never play for Australia, plus it's a waste of a really big tattoo.How do they come off by the way?? Fri 09 Jan 2009 00:23:34 GMT+1 archLionheart This thing about swapping one South African for another is getting a bit lame. International sport is not as it used to be and players from all countries play in different teams. As I understand it Strauss came to England when he was a very young boy, 5yrs old or so. If that is right he's as English as Symonds is Australian. Lets just move on from this and agree that if you qualify to play for a particular country under the rules then that's it. Fri 09 Jan 2009 00:17:45 GMT+1 dudepod45 The farce that is English cricket continues. Supposing Strauss fails with the bat against the West Indies- his technique, or lack of it, at the moment is v.worrying. Who's going to captain the Ashes team?Supposing KP decides that the IPL is a better bet having been kicked in the teeth by the blazered buffoons of the ECB. I could go on but it's all so depressing. It seems axiomatic that the boards in control of our major sports, like rugby, soccer and cricket, are in it for reasons other than ensuring we excel in these sports. Fri 09 Jan 2009 00:01:01 GMT+1 Benfleet_Mike I think that Strauss would have been the better choice in the first place.Pietersen's ego is a force to be reckoned with and I hope it doesn't interfere with his ambitions to be the best test batsman in the world.If he wants to challenge the greats and go down in history, he needs to get runs for England, which he can do.Forget all this media-inflated guff. Thu 08 Jan 2009 23:19:42 GMT+1 harryhpalmer Chamber wrote:Shambolic, there really are only 2 organizations in the world that could mishandle as badly as this, and they are both English- our doddering friends at the FA and the ECB...Surely he's forgotten about the RFU? Thu 08 Jan 2009 23:18:46 GMT+1 Wazza1806 22. At 10:16pm on 08 Jan 2009, barkonk wrote:Didn't England beat Pakiston 3-0 in the series, and it was an assured and ruthless streak.U don't have to be FIGJAM(KP) to be ruthless. A quite person can be as ruthless than an over the top egoistic person.Struass has back to back series against a poosr opposition and winning those 2 series can put in in good stead to takle the aussies who rnt the supreme force they were once. So good luck strauss.KP should have learnt how to deal and win within a system. He couldn't takle the system in SA, so he came here, If he cant takle this system, what will he do?????Comments:If he can't tackle the English system he will look for someone within the family who has either an Australian or Indian background and then offer his services to those countries!! Thu 08 Jan 2009 23:09:01 GMT+1 TheamazingMrWhite Its a shame that KP was too arrogant and immature to be a good captain. It was nice, at least for a while, to have a captain whos place in the squad was never called into question - a question that hung over Vaughan for ages (and may well hang over Strauss - but heres hoping not).Excellent article Mihir. Thu 08 Jan 2009 22:55:32 GMT+1 MickGatting These events leave me feeling very optimistic for England´s chances of winning back the Ashes. Peter Moores lacks the tactical experience to add insight to any cricket captaincy so his departure is a relief and a big plus for us.KP was a better captain than I expected him to be,so I am sad to see him go like this but Andrew Strauss was my preference when MPV resigned so hopefully he will pick up where he left off after beating Pakistan.Andrew Strauss has a fine tactical mind and IMHO is better placed to captain us to beat the Aussies than anybody else that has played for England since 2005, we wish him victory! Thu 08 Jan 2009 22:50:35 GMT+1 Luggsy67 I'm not too worried, IMO this has worked out for the best. KP is our star man (as David Lloyds 'military' friend pointed out, star men don't make the best leaders but you need them in the team, only Viv has succeeded (any others? I can't think of any but i'm sure someone will) but who could fail with that team) and I believe he will still be our star man. If he is a team player we have no worries, if not he will still perform as a batsmen to maintain his profile as a leading world batting star, we still benefit. If he goes to the IPL, it means he would have done it at some time anyway. Moores was clearly not doing what he promised in terms of progress at test and one day cricket. Strauss has performed well in captaincy as a stand in, but anyone needs the opportunity to prove themselves at this level. A good start so far in front of the cameras, but who cares about that.I don't think he's a soft touch, you can't be as an opening bat, especially as a dual nationality player, he's dealt with plenty, and he england dressing room has never been a harmonious arena.Was that really Harmy telling people to sort it out? Incredible.England's management is embarrassing, but when was it ever anything else?I see the ashes as an even contest, can't wait. The Windies should be a good warm up as well as they seem to be showing some fight now.It would be dull if we weren't typically England. Thu 08 Jan 2009 22:28:17 GMT+1 grumpyspindoctor Is it just me posting or on here at the mo? if so I'm wasting my time (as usual!) Thu 08 Jan 2009 22:18:07 GMT+1 grumpyspindoctor KP is 28. If he is going to be a great he needs to start delivering and soon - or he'll be a lost talent. One great innings in 2005 does not make him a Gower or Botham. I know this is a different subject - but related - is he over hyped? when we aehv a dearth of greats in the England side? For me Simon Jones, Harmy even Gilo will be better remembered by history if time stopped now.Comments?GSD Thu 08 Jan 2009 22:17:32 GMT+1 barkonk This post has been Removed Thu 08 Jan 2009 22:16:41 GMT+1 twentyhours KP a man who only thinks of himself. Should never been captain and if his pals in the media had not pushed so hard for him he would never become captain. The gravy train was rolling and they all jumped on board. KP is a brilliant cricketer and will set many a record in the years to come but its about sport and not people making money out of sport. He may be out of pocket put some Sky sports commentators and Fleet Street writers need to ask themselves a few questions! Thu 08 Jan 2009 22:08:29 GMT+1 barkonk I feel its very strange that ECB can't handle the players and info in place, and they make a mess of things.KP and Peter moores were out of their depth during India tour be it ODI's or tests, and the failure of winning a competitive match in India.Does this put Aussies in favourable position to keep hold of the ashes??????? Cant wait for it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thu 08 Jan 2009 21:53:17 GMT+1 grumpyspindoctor OK so badly handled by KP and the ECB - I and many others on this blog had serious doubts about KP to begin with - but once appointed we, to our credit, got behind him. I'm sure there will be much raking over the coals in coming days and weeks - if they have any sense none of the parties will comment further. What's done is done. My point (at long last) is that regardless of his form or batting style, isn't Strauss a really good guy in front of the media? During the interview I came to the conclusion that 'this guy is good'. A perfect front man in dealing with the media - a straighter bat than he sometimes shows on the field. He's a decent guy, let's back him. maybe he can score a few runs at 8 in the one day side!GSD Thu 08 Jan 2009 21:44:22 GMT+1 Flt_Lt_Jamie Not quite the awful stuff the cricket correspondent of The Independent was putting out recently but still missing one very central point. One which will continue to recur and which the ECB have shown incapable of understanding.KP is unbelievably, frighteningly driven. Some call it selfish, others single minded. At least those who are scared of such a powerful motivation do. The ECB should know how to handle such people. Giles Clarke is supposed to be a successful businessman. There are people as driven as KP in business. I had lunch with one recently. They aren't all that rare. They're not all that common either but they are around. And are going to get more common in cricket as the amount of money involved gets bigger and bigger.The ECB is guilty of totally mishandling this situation. It could and should have been dealt with behind closed doors. Unless hard lessons are learned by the ECB something similar is going to happen again. Thu 08 Jan 2009 21:42:41 GMT+1 Herbi J Should have sacked KP first. Then anything else you do is from a position of strength. Everyone can see what an arrogant so and so he is. I'd have sacked him for engendering disunity and banned him for a couple of tests then decided what you want to do about the coach. Thu 08 Jan 2009 21:18:36 GMT+1 spiritualwolf Your own bias shows up all too clearly - judgment after judgment, all without letting KP have his say at all. I fear you're part of the 'establishment' and hence part of the problem, Mihir. It's not just English cricket, the ECB and KP who need to take long, hard looks at themselves, but the media - and that includes you. Thu 08 Jan 2009 21:10:14 GMT+1 eccles45 "It is a crisis that will see the England team very likely go to the West Indies without a proper coach and with Hugh Morris talking on a more hands-on role"Is that the same Hugh Morris whoo Yesterday read out a statement and then ran awayo Today gave a very brief intro to Strauss and then ran away Thu 08 Jan 2009 21:07:54 GMT+1 someoneIII This post has been Removed Thu 08 Jan 2009 21:04:57 GMT+1 fczenit This seems spot on to me, lev davidovich. Agnew is saying pretty much the same thing. Pietersen obviously took a reckless gamble without even imagining it was one, sure that his position was secure due to his prowess as a player and his popularity.He was utterly wrong, and this is hardly the kind of decision a succesful captain in the making would take. Thu 08 Jan 2009 21:03:50 GMT+1 seagulljavea I do hope nobody believes anything in this article, for the sake of English cricket.Due the comments awaiting moderation I do not expect this to see the light of day. Thu 08 Jan 2009 20:44:38 GMT+1 judge9847 I'd call it a shambles but that's being unkind to other, professionally disorganised shambles around the world. FA please note.Quite clearly ECB don't have a clue how to a) manage the people they employ and b) deal with the press. They are amateurs of the first order.Also, if we take KP's resignation statement as factually accurate - "At no time, contrary to press speculation, have I released any unauthorised information to the media regarding my relationships with the players, coaches and the ECB itself" - then it would appear ECB "polled" the current England squad on the basis of newspaper speculation alone or worse, on an article they had approved.What an un-holy mess. It's ECB so-called management that should resign and immediately. Thu 08 Jan 2009 20:41:39 GMT+1 Inherent with an ashes tour ahead and a good sense of one over the aussies,it looks now it will be the australians with the upper hand .will we see K.P. playing for the yankees next Thu 08 Jan 2009 20:37:45 GMT+1 fergaljpc This post has been Removed Thu 08 Jan 2009 20:36:28 GMT+1 hainba Mr Bose,The post 2007 structure that was put in place is still ultimately answerable to the ECB and lacks any true independence to modernise the England team.You stop short in your verdict of damining the ECB disappointing as their catalogue of mismanagement of our national game (Satellite TV only) and the national team (wrong capt, players and coach) continues to amaze but never surprise the social cricketers and loyal supporters.Club cricket is left to struggle (and in this economic down turn more clubs will fail) while promises of funding rarely make their way to the grass roots (unless you jump through hoops) and the counties take their share but spend it on Kolpaker's rather than the homegrown talent for the future - who would want to be a cricket pro now?On the plus side we the public have 3 years later than we should've got Strauss as England captain. Now all we need is an experienced coach who knows international cricket and the resignation of the chairman, board and selectors - not much to ask for!Yours sincerely,Frustrated club player, volunteer coach and fan of this great game called cricket! Thu 08 Jan 2009 20:32:00 GMT+1 Summer-of-George The ECB have replaced one South African (Pietersen) with another (Strauss). What's the fuss? Thu 08 Jan 2009 20:26:06 GMT+1 colinacronin True, the ECB was going to remove the coach but that would be presented as an independent decision and not one giving into Pietersen's ultimatum. You may say this is lame, but that is how the ECB saw it. That statement puts it in a nut shell. The ECB thinks first of it's own image. That is not just lame, it is legless and completely unacceptable. Is their personal pride more important than English Cricket. Thu 08 Jan 2009 20:11:44 GMT+1 JimmyMonkfish Take it you are not keen on KP then! Thu 08 Jan 2009 20:09:00 GMT+1 levdavidovich This post has been Removed Thu 08 Jan 2009 20:02:50 GMT+1 Adrianovic As efforts go to sum up the whole sorry saga, that's probably as good as I've seen.Thanks, Mihir.Ade Thu 08 Jan 2009 19:54:11 GMT+1 cryin' white tears KP was to immature to captain England. But is Strauss to dull? Thu 08 Jan 2009 19:42:01 GMT+1 Chambers68 Shambolic, there really are only 2 organizations in the world that could mishandle as badly as this, and they are both English- our doddering friends at the FA and the ECB. Airing dirty laundry in the NOTW is hardly smart either.Although a mess I actually think the outcome is a positive one, Moores simply had to go as he was totally out of his depth. KP showed some worrying signs from a tactical point of view in India and I think Strauss has far more nous. The only issues are a) the one day side and the simple answer is Strauss for bell at the top of the order, and b) KP as a foot soldier again, and in that we can only hope for the best as we won't win the Ashes without him on form.Good luck Straussy.Ps: tom moody for coachPps: Ashley giles 6/1?! Laughable Thu 08 Jan 2009 19:35:32 GMT+1