Custom Bats Cricket Forum
General Cricket => Players => Topic started by: shazz on July 09, 2012, 08:45:11 PM
-
Having seen this on the forum, as an opinion of Kevin Pietersen's stance (s'cuse the pun) to playing more coloured clothing matches for England, I wondered what opinions of him generally were, especially after the new comments... This is the quote,
"I've defended him in the past but I give up. KP is a bellend. Throws his toys out of pram and now wants back in. There's something sociopathic about the tool. No one's bigger than the game, no matter how much brylcreem or an Indian motorbike company pay you...
I'd rather lose the World 2020 with the current England team than let this self-acclaimed hero strut about in Sri Lanka like he's the bee's knees."
For me, I've read his autobiography, and been a fan for a long long time, (a highlight being that I saw his 200 at Lords against India), I do understand the frustrations, but should we not encourage players to practice at the shorter-formats especially when for years we have been awful, and now there is a "rotation" policy in place anyway. I think that KP has been hard done by.
The irony is that only KP and Owais Shah have played regularly for an IPL team this year, proving that they are the two best batsmen we have in the (very) short format... Yet neither will represent us on the highest stage.
My problem... that England rest players dubiously, and sometimes against their will, yet, if a player wants a break, he has no option.
Opinions?
-
Owais Shah is not one of the very best limited overs cricketers in England... good, yes, but would he get in over any of the other players. You must also remember that a lot weren't picked up in the auction and didn't even want to play.
-
Owais Shah is not one of the very best limited overs cricketers in England... good, yes, but would he get in over any of the other players. You must also remember that a lot weren't picked up in the auction and didn't even want to play.
Owais Shah has one of the best t20 records for an Englishman
-
Records yes, but I'm not sure it stacks up these days. I love Owais Shah but just don't think he's international standard anymore..... perhaps.
-
This might sound so stupid, but who is the quote from Shazz? Is it Graeme Swann?
-
Me
-
Oh right, thought it was one of the England players!
-
But should we encourage more players to get middle time pre-season in the IPL playing a game or two a week,
Or have them stuck in the gyms, and indoor nets, especially with the sort of weather we have been having these last few years?
-
Probably not the best place for this article to go, however...
This is a great article on KP's technique by Aakash Chopra:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/668343.html (http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/668343.html)
If a cricket aficionado were to pay to watch a contemporary player bat, Kevin Pietersen would likely be at the top of his wishlist.
Pietersen might have looked vulnerable against some left-arm spinners in the past, but when he gets going he's simply unstoppable. In an age when not many batsmen can instil fear in a bowler's mind, Pietersen's stocks are rising by the day.
In the second innings of the Oval Test, Pietersen was, once again, in his element and dominated the Australian attack. He not only scored runs but also established his supremacy in a manner that made the bowlers look helpless.
His charge down the track accentuates his big frame; his audacity in moving around the crease makes bowlers revise their plans in the middle of their run-up; and then he tops it with an unparalleled ability to find holes in the field.
His style makes him one of the most difficult batsmen to bowl at. He's quick to use his feet to the spinners, to get to the pitch of the ball, and to use his height to get on top of the bounce when the fast bowlers dig it in short. And he's never shy of playing unorthodox shots or taking the aerial route.
Let's start with his slightly unusual stance, where his feet are wider apart than for most modern-day batsmen. While this stance provides more stability, there is the danger of sacrificing mobility, for most players, but Pietersen's brilliance lies in how he has found a way around it - his forward-press is quite predominant, to the extent that he often walks towards the bowler, but he is seldom hurried by quick short-pitched stuff. Most bowlers dig it in short when they see a batsman charge towards them, but Pietersen seems to have all the time in the world even when the distance between him and the bowler reduces.
While some of it has to do with his natural ability to pick the line and length a shade earlier than the rest, a lot of it is about him putting in the hours to practise playing everything on the front front, even against the quickest bowlers. Once he has lunged forward, he doesn't try to get onto the back foot, even if the bowler has pitched it short, and that ensures he doesn't get into odd positions. That's when his height comes to his rescue too, for he manages to stay on top of the bounce on most occasions in spite of having a long front-foot stride.
His style of playing attacking shots - off the front foot to fast bowlers - helps him hit balls in areas that have been left unprotected. For instance, in an earlier Ashes match, Mitchell Starc had a midwicket and a square leg for the whip off the front foot - if he bowled fuller - and off the back foot if he went a little short. But Pietersen played a short ball off the front foot a lot earlier than he would have played it off the back foot, and managed to hit it between the two fielders. Placing the ball is all about the point of impact, and if you can change it effectively, you will hit the gaps often: that's exactly what Pietersen does on either side of the pitch.
He also walks across the stumps, almost taunting the bowlers to bowl straight and hit the pads. Little do the bowlers who walk into his trap know that he seldom misses the ball. And even when he does, he has come so far across that the impact is invariably outside off stump. Here too, his regulation shots go into the gap and not to the fielders. For example, if the ball is full and slightly outside off, most batsmen would hit an off-drive towards mid-off but Pietersen will probably walk across and play an on-drive. And since his on-drive is played from outside off, it goes between the bowler and mid-on.
While Pietersen is always lunging forward to fast bowlers, he's a completely different package against spinners. He latches on to every opportunity to dance down the track, at times even when the ball isn't flighted, for he wants to make his intentions known. His stepping out, thanks to his height, is a little different from that of others - he covers more ground than most. As a result, he not only forces the bowler to radically cut down on flight but also finds gaps because he is playing so far down the pitch. The moment the bowler errs and pitches short, expecting the batsman to step out, Pietersen goes deep in the crease to hit powerful shots off the back foot.
He is one of those batsmen who encourages a lot of kids to pick up the bat and learn the craft, but they would be wiser if they didn't try to emulate him, for his brand of cricket comes with a disclaimer "Try it at your own peril."
-
There's far better "Team" players in the country than KP, but when a player of such calibre makes himself available how do you say no?
He's a match winner and has the ability to destroy attacks. Me personally, I think Ian Bell is a far better batsman (Technique etc)
I wish the ECB would take a firm stance on this issue though because its is quickly becoming a joke and we are now seeing players becoming "freelance mercenaries" traveling from competition to competition chasing a pay day.
-
Good article and very true. You would never coach anyone to bat like KP but it just goes to show that trying to coach out natural talent is not always the way but it happens a lot in this country. Would KP bat like he does if he was coached in England as a kid?
-
Good article and very true. You would never coach anyone to bat like KP but it just goes to show that trying to coach out natural talent is not always the way but it happens a lot in this country. Would KP bat like he does if he was coached in England as a kid?
no
hence why we don't produce such talents. I'm no coach but there are far too many 'bad' coaches around now who just go off the manual and don't just work with peoples natural talents. Players are also judged far too much on how 'technical' they are/look rather than purely on 'who scores the most runs'.. which after all.. is the name of the game
-
no
hence why we don't produce such talents. I'm no coach but there are far too many 'bad' coaches around now who just go off the manual and don't just work with peoples natural talents. Players are also judged far too much on how 'technical' they are/look rather than purely on 'who scores the most runs'.. which after all.. is the name of the game
Yet some of the best coaches I have seen work true to the coaching manual! And coach ed is moving away from that now. Unfortunately the counties aren't and are still picking the most attractive players who can hit runs for fun on a flat quick deck but have no idea on anything else, whereas players who just score runs on any pitch yet look a bit different will not get picked. Don't blame the coaches, blame the scouts!
-
Yet some of the best coaches I have seen work true to the coaching manual! And coach ed is moving away from that now. Unfortunately the counties aren't and are still picking the most attractive players who can hit runs for fun on a flat quick deck but have no idea on anything else, whereas players who just score runs on any pitch yet look a bit different will not get picked. Don't blame the coaches, blame the scouts!
nick is of course vastly more experienced and knowledgeable than I so... Blame the scouts!! Hang them!! :)
I'm sure it's just a mixture of the whole set up tbh, from picking kids up when they are young all the way to the top.
-
THe biggest problem is the complete lack of interest from state schools! When 95% of school children don't play cricket at school, people are going to get missed anyway. I would be interested to know what proportion of pro's are from a private school background. I bet it isn't proportionate to the number of kids educated in state and private schools!
-
THe biggest problem is the complete lack of interest from state schools! When 95% of school children don't play cricket at school, people are going to get missed anyway. I would be interested to know what proportion of pro's are from a private school background. I bet it isn't proportionate to the number of kids educated in state and private schools!
So.. the question is.. HOw do you get cricket back into state schools?? Does the ECB have to give schools 'free' kit etc?? Maybe provide some 'coaches' to run school teams and training sessions? rely on 'chance to shine'? or maybe give actual clubs money if they link to schools AND run school teams etc? ECB sponsor school leagues/cup comps? maybe give the schools incentives to enter and win them etc
-
From what I've seen in my local area the majority of the secondary schools do run teams , but a lot of people who haven't had the chance to play in primary school will not turn up to these because of the lack of a team/school coaching in the primary schools.
-
From what I've seen in my local area the majority of the secondary schools do run teams , but a lot of people who haven't had the chance to play in primary school will not turn up to these because of the lack of a team/school coaching in the primary schools.
And how many of those teams are put together the day before the game with no training, go out to play a 20 over game on an artificial that should have been condemmed a long time ago, where 29-9 after 20 overs is a good score? Is it any wonder that pupils dislike the game. What it needs is a complete redesign of the format that is played in school, something like LMS or some sort of speed cricket that is over in 90-120 minutes, that the teachers can get behind (and enjoy taking the kids to, because that is problem no. 2), and the kids enjoy because its quick, and promotes people hitting the ball, not standing in the field for an hour watching the batting team accumulate 30 runs because the pitch is so poor!
-
Surprisingly in my local area secondary school cricket actually seems to be played at quite a high standard , although I can see how that may differ quite a bit across the country. Looking at the schools county cup and league here all the games are 20 overs and most teams do seem to get past 100 most of the time , which for secondary school students isn't that bad in my eyes.
On the other hand though , about half the schools in my local area play on artificial pitches which is a bit of a problem. But I guess that could come from the lack of funds which may be something the ECB could help with in some way. Some of the outfields are also a bit poor as well due to being shared with the football/rugby teams (un-surprisingly these also seemed to be the teams with the artificial pitches who I guess take it less seriously than the others.
For secondary school students I think 20 overs is a decent length game , but depending on the situations with cricket at other schools around the country I can see why others may suggest differently. A large amount of the players you get turning up for school matches are also club players as well.
-
10 Overs max, LMS style with some sort of roll out pitch that can go down on any surface. The ECB is promoting Kwik Cricket with Asda for primary school kids.
-
I know personally a format like that would have put me and my mates who played for the school team , who also played for club teams , off school cricket a bit. I would just feel like it was too inferior in comparison to club colts level cricket , but then I guess the aim of your idea is not to aid people playing club colts cricket , but infact introducing people who have rarely played the sport before to it , in which the format you suggested would make sense in that way.
-
I know personally a format like that would have put me and my mates who played for the school team , who also played for club teams , off school cricket a bit. I would just feel like it was too inferior in comparison to club colts level cricket , but then I guess the aim of your idea is not to aid people playing club colts cricket , but infact introducing people who have rarely played the sport before to it , in which the format you suggested would make sense in that way.
And there's the thing. I poo-pooed LMS at first, but once I started playing it, it made me a better longer format player as a bowler, and more aggressive as a batsman. I really enjoy it.
-
THe biggest problem is the complete lack of interest from state schools! When 95% of school children don't play cricket at school, people are going to get missed anyway. I would be interested to know what proportion of pro's are from a private school background. I bet it isn't proportionate to the number of kids educated in state and private schools!
The private/ state education ratio in England teams in recent years has been about 50/50, I believe. I'm not sure if this includes the SA factor.
-
So no then, its nowhere near proportionate!
-
So no then, its nowhere near proportionate!
Agreed.
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/kevinpietersen/10884957/Kevin-Pietersen-The-England-dressing-room-during-the-Ashes-series-was-no-fun-Im-glad-to-be-out.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/kevinpietersen/10884957/Kevin-Pietersen-The-England-dressing-room-during-the-Ashes-series-was-no-fun-Im-glad-to-be-out.html)
Kevin Pietersen: The England dressing room during the Ashes series was no fun - I'm glad to be out
If the series in Australia last winter taught us anything, it was that they should never host back-to-back Ashes series again
I will have no anger, no negative thoughts whatsoever when England walk out without me at Lord’s on Thursday to play their first Test since the winter. I wish my friends in the England team well. I have moved on from the England and Wales Cricket Board’s decision to end my international career and have put things in perspective.
Fourteen years ago, I was an off-spinner from Pietermaritzburg who did not know where his life was going. I had a notion that I wanted to make a life in England but had no idea if I would succeed.
Now I have played 104 Tests, batted at all the best grounds in the world and been lucky enough to score hundreds everywhere. Could I play more Test cricket? Yes of course, but should I sit here thinking I should be playing on Thursday? No, because that is when jealousy and negative thoughts come into your head.
I am grateful for what I have had and moved on with my life. I have scored 13,500 international runs for England and it would be greedy to want more, so I am at peace with everything.
It took only a couple of conversations with my family to start thinking this way because of how much I really did not enjoy the winter.
In fact, it has been a relief to be out of the dressing room because it was not a pleasant place in Australia. We were losing and in my opinion the environment was poor and I was not alone in thinking that. It is a view shared by a number of the players who have spoken their minds since coming back from the tour.
Now I have had time to reflect on the winter it is clear to me that back-to-back Ashes should never happen again. It was really hard for the England team to go to Australia and defend the Ashes just weeks after winning at home.
As soon as we arrived the Australian media turned the heat up on us. I have had that for years so it did not bother me. It was fun. But for other players you could sense it was a problem. The senior players were tired and it soon became a really long grind against an Australian side that had their backs up in their own country.
Australia knew they came close to winning here. The 3-0 defeat last summer was not a true reflection of that series in terms of the way they played their cricket and we played ours, so I knew it was going to be a tight return contest and we were not equipped to handle it.
Mitchell Johnson was sensational on those pitches and he was handled brilliantly by Michael Clarke. Even if he picked up a wicket in his third or fourth over of a spell, Clarke would take him off and save him for later in the day. It was brilliant captaincy. Johnson’s bowling was the best and most aggressive I have seen during my career, and I told him so at the end of the Test series when we shared a beer.
By then I thought that Andy Flower wanted me out. After the Sydney Test, a headline came out claiming Flower had said to the ECB it was either “him or me”. He denied saying that but the damage was done.
But my relationship with the other players was fine. We had an incredible tour on and off the field. I was helping all the bowlers out with their batting, and the night we lost 5-0 we were all having a drink in the bar together with our wives and girlfriends, which proves all was OK between us and still is.
I have no issue with the players, as many have said in interviews since the tour ended. I speak to Stuart Broad and I even organised for Graeme Swann to go on holiday to one of my friend’s hotels after he retired.
On a personal note, I did not score the runs I would have liked in Australia but I have played a certain way throughout my career and will continue to do so. There is method to my batting but I play on instinct as well and I would absolutely play that way again if we could go back in time.
In the first innings at Brisbane, I was caught at midwicket. As soon as the ball left Ryan Harris’s hand I thought ‘four’. I saw the angle and thought ‘bang it through midwicket’, but I got caught out. In the second innings, all I tried to do was help a short ball from Johnson to fine leg because it was too tight to pull, but I was caught again.
In Adelaide, I walked out to the crease and felt like I did not know which side of the bat I was holding. I felt that terrible and that is why I was walking at Peter Siddle and playing him on the full.
As soon as I was dismissed I walked out of the dressing room to the nets with Richard Halsall, the assistant coach, and spent 45 minutes trying to figure out how to bat again. I felt that bad, the worst I have ever experienced in an Ashes series.
Why? I do not fully know. But my knee was hassling me a bit. I had an injection a few weeks before and during that innings it was hurting. In the dressing room everyone takes the mickey out of how I bend my knee during my stance because of how exaggerated the movement can be. But in Adelaide, because of the knee pain, I was standing a lot taller in the crease and that changed my game. I said to Halsall and spin coach Mushtaq Ahmed: “I can’t bat like that again.” I had to work hard to get myself back to playing normally again. In the second innings I made 53 and played very responsibly.
My dismissal in the second innings at Perth has received a lot of attention. I was caught at long on trying to hit Nathan Lyon for a second six. But if I see that ball again, I will still try to hit it for six. No problem. As he tossed it up I thought ‘six more there’. If you look at my career, that is how I play. People say it is irresponsible but it was not; it was successful.
Look at the innings that started it all off – the 158 against Australia in the 2005 Ashes at the Oval. I was hooking Brett Lee at 95mph into the stands. Any one of those shots could have gone straight up in the air and been caught. The 186 in Mumbai in 2012 is talked about as the best innings by a foreigner in India. I took risks during that hundred. I am England’s leading run scorer in all forms of cricket because of playing that way.
People say I should have ground it out. Should I? What would have been different?
What I have done during my career is ignore the ridiculous praise and the ridiculous criticism. I have stayed even and been mentally strong enough to keep believing in my methods and what I think is the best way for me to be successful.
It would have been easy for me to start defending a bit more. Would that have made me a better player? No. I am a risk-taker in cricket, in business and all parts of my life.
Coaching needs to focus more on natural talent
I have kept busy since my England career ended. I loved the Indian Premier League, even though results were disappointing for Delhi and now I am focused on Surrey and my business life.
I am extremely excited about establishing my cricket academy and foundation, which will launch in October in Dubai.
In total we have identified seven countries, including England, where we want to establish academies. The first is being built at the moment on a great plot in Dubai which will include a cricket field, pavilion and classrooms with the plan to coach kids between the ages of eight and 18.
My foundation will fund 13 disadvantaged kids and two chaperones from seven countries to come to my facility to be trained there for two weeks, guided by our coaching, taught the fitness and mental side of the game but to also have fun too. Then two years later I will pay for all the kids from the seven countries to come back and play a mini World Cup in Dubai against each other.
At the moment we are setting down how I want the kids to be coached and making sure we get that set up right.
My guiding principles are that I want to coach kids the way they play and not from a textbook. You want kids to grow up believing in their own natural talent and strengths.
I do not have a good technique at all. Sometimes I watch myself on television and I am embarrassed about my technique. I do not know how I score runs other than through self-confidence and belief in my ability.
Look at Lasith Malinga. How the hell does he get wickets bowling like that?
But his technique works for him. If he was a young England player he would probably have drifted out of the game. I have seen how coaching is now especially for kids. Ball on a cone, high elbow and hit through the ball.
In my opinion that is not the only way to coach and its holding back some natural talent. The game has changed and coaching has to change too.
Kevin Pietersen: Jos Buttler and Ben Stokes must be in the England Test side
I find it impossible to understand why England have not picked such exciting young talents - they need to be playing as much international cricket as possible
The first step to England putting the winter behind them is to identify the brand of cricket they want to play. I would like to see a positive, aggressive England. That is what entertains but I am not sure they have the personnel to play that way.
People talk about my runs winning Test matches and how England will miss that but the main reason this summer is going to be incredibly hard is because they have lost Graeme Swann. He used to control games in the first innings by keeping the runs down while also being capable of taking five-fors. In the second innings he would then destroy teams with his wickets and his retirement is the biggest problem for England this summer.
I have just spent six weeks in the Indian Premier League and know what those players think about Swann in Test cricket. They all say how Swann was huge for England and they will come here with more confidence because he has gone. I do not have England down as favourites to win the Test series this summer for this reason alone.
I would pick four seamers because there isn’t a spinner good enough to play Test cricket for England at the moment.
When England named the Test squad last week I was disappointed to see a few faces missing. I don’t understand why Ben Stokes is not playing at Lord’s this week. In Australia I saw a genuine star, somebody who walked into cricket’s toughest environment and who immediately did not feel intimidated by either the heat of an Ashes or the pace of Mitchell Johnson. He has a bright future for England and should be playing as much international cricket as possible.
England are worried about his lack of cricket but he has played two championship matches for Durham, and he strikes me as one of those players who rises to the occasion. Some players need lots of match practice, others can just switch it on because they have that confidence to help them perform. He is one of those and making him play more championship cricket rather than his first Lord’s Test is not going to help.
England picked Sam Robson, and good luck to him, but I feel Nick Compton should open with Alastair Cook. He did nothing wrong when he played for England. He is experienced and deserves another decent run in the side.
Ian Bell should bat at three. The time is right for him to take hold of that spot. He is a fantastic player, positive and great to watch. I would bat Joe Root at four. He has had an up and down time but you can tell if players have that certain something to succeed at Test level and I see Root as a player who has it mentally.
I would have chosen Eoin Morgan at five, Gary Ballance at six with Jos Buttler keeping wicket.
I find it unbelievable that we have started the summer with Buttler not an automatic choice for England’s Test side.
If he is not a good enough keeper for Test cricket then he should not be playing in the one-day internationals. Look at South Africa’s AB de Villiers: his keeping is not his strongest point but he does the job for the best team in the world.
Even when Adam Gilchrist retired he was still not the greatest keeper in the world but he was a game-changer with the bat. Buttler is a game-changer too and you want the opposition thinking when they get the team five down ‘oh no Buttler is coming out’.
He can get a hundred off 70-100 balls. The way the England team is set up with Cook and the defensive players at the top of the order, they should normally be able to counter the new ball so game-changers like Morgan, Stokes and Buttler can destroy teams later on.
I look at Buttler and it reminds me of when I started my Test career. The perceptions are the same. People said I was not the finished article and didn’t think I was ready for Test cricket. But when you find someone like Buttler with that X-factor then you must give them the chance. They will find a way to succeed.
He has a great attitude. I speak to him a lot. He rings me for advice about certain bits and pieces and he wants to learn. He phoned me recently to ask about how to play Lasith Malinga’s yorkers and it is a great sign he wants to take on board as much knowledge as possible.
The public want to see players like Stokes and Buttler who are young, vibrant and talented given a chance. A few senior players have finished so blood the youngsters by giving them a decent run in the side.
England have talked about a new era. Well, you need to pick a team the public believe in so they will buy into it. The chat leading into this series has been about a younger side and the public want to see that backed up in selection.
Giles paid for being too close to me
I felt really sorry for Ashley Giles when he missed out on the England head coach job. I spoke to him afterwards and told him I thought he had it nailed. But sadly I think he was just too close to me for the England and Wales Cricket Board’s liking. That is the problem. He had spoken too positively about me in Australia for the ECB to give him the job. It is a shame for both sides.
Instead, they turned to Peter Moores. First and foremost I believe England should not have appointed someone who has done the job before. It was time for fresh ideas.
But they have gone back to Peter and this time I think he will have a better chance of success.
I never had any issues with Peter as a person when he was coach and I was captain five years ago. In my opinion, at the time I did not feel Peter was the right man to take England forward. But the good thing about Peter is he is a nice man and he speaks very well. He never coached me but I saw him work well with others. His energy, enthusiasm and will to make people improve is outstanding.
This time there is not a crop of senior players to resist his methods or with the personality to challenge him. They might say things behind his back but they will not take him on in front of others and that will give Peter a better chance of success.
-
Yawn!!! Quite possibly the most boring, self promoting article I have ever read. (No Swearing Please) off already!
-
Imagine how much he got paid for this. You almost know what he is going to say.
-
There you have it - in a nutshell, to appoint Moores as coach KP had to go. If Giles had been coach then KP might of still been playing for England. Giles could of handled KP, having played together and England might of played their First XI this summer. KP isn't wrong on Stokes and possibly Buttler.
-
Yawn!!! Quite possibly the most boring, self promoting article I have ever read. (No Swearing Please) off already!
It helps when the same paragraphs aren't copied twice lol (I've edited it)
-
Much better. Got very confused!
-
I thought it was quite a good read, slightly changed my opinion on him a little, it all sounds very honest and I agree with a lot of what he said
-
To be honest, i think KP as hit the nail on the head there, about england, and about his career. The england selection policy is totally crap, and is going to end in a shed load of losses this summer, our coaching is a pile of floating excrement - ruining up and coming talents like Finn, and to an extent ruining Anderson by making him slow down by about 5 mph. And finally, all England cricket is now, is a set up of yes men, and anyone that slightly rocks the boat (i.e. alex hales, Nick Compton and K.P.) alll get ousted and dont get to play. Bloody ridiculous.
-
To be honest, i think KP as hit the nail on the head there, about england, and about his career. The england selection policy is totally crap, and is going to end in a shed load of losses this summer, our coaching is a pile of floating excrement - ruining up and coming talents like Finn, and to an extent ruining Anderson by making him slow down by about 5 mph. And finally, all England cricket is now, is a set up of yes men, and anyone that slightly rocks the boat (i.e. alex hales, Nick Compton and K.P.) alll get ousted and dont get to play. Bloody ridiculous.
I think Anderson slowing down by 5mph was more to do with the very successful 4 bowler attack and the workload placed on the 3 seamers. Anderson or Broad simply couldn't bowl high 80's/90 as they wouldn't make it through 90 overs. It was noticeable that Broad sped up when Stokes was included and 4 seamers became an option.
-
I agree with large amounts of what was said in the articles
especially around the brand of cricket required to win test matches and about having people in the dressing room willing and articulate enough to challenge the approach and the plans.
Strong leadership must allow challenge and encourage it.
-
I quite like most of what he has to say and agree with a lot of it. im surprised by how many players and television people seem to mention about coaching and trying to make everybody the same and yet nothing seems to change.
I do wish that england would try and play a more exciting brand of cricket and go back to playing 5 bowlers certainly makes for more interesting cricket
-
Which is why leaving out stokes and buttler is crazy. Both are all rounders, and sad as it seems, I think Prior is probably at the end of his England stay.
I'd love to see a bowling attack of Anderson, Broad, Jordan, "insert name of good spinner here" and Stokes.... Think it would definitely broaden our options.
-
Good article,
I do wonder if the Buttler choice is pushed as KP and Prior have both removed each other from their Christmas card lists....
-
It is one side of the story and is agenda and publicity driven. His PR and comms advisors are clearly following the old motto that you catch more flies with honey than vinegar...
should KP still be playing test cricket? Absolutely. But its his fault as much as the ECBs that he's not.
-
It is one side of the story and is agenda and publicity driven. His PR and comms advisors are clearly following the old motto that you catch more flies with honey than vinegar...
should KP still be playing test cricket? Absolutely. But its his fault as much as the ECBs that he's not.
It's his fault he's not a yes man? Maybe so but that's a bit unfair.
In every team there's people who don't get on, people in club cricket grit their teeth and tolerate each other, so why England can't do the same (and in doing so, select their strongest side) baffles me...
-
It's his fault he's not a yes man? Maybe so but that's a bit unfair.
In every team there's people who don't get on, people in club cricket grit their teeth and tolerate each other, so why England can't do the same (and in doing so, select their strongest side) baffles me...
totally agree, why they can't do what 95% of club teams (who don't get paid for playing) do each week I don't know.
-
Wouldn't it be nice to actually know the truth..
Not a bad article though tbf. England are a pretty poorly managed, poorly led side with no real star quality now unfortunately.
-
KP a (nearly) 34 year old batsman with a dodgy knee and an over-inflated ego that did not want to just play tests.
A man who wanted to play T20s to keep his IPL price up?
There are what, 6 new faces in the team over the last few months.
Stokes will be back after a game or two and either Plunkett or Jordan will make way (depending who performs better).
Buttler was not 1st choice for Somerset, so needs a few games under his belt for Lancashire to be fair. I would think Prior for these three tests vs SL and then go from there.
KP makes some good points, but it seems it is a bit late for it.
Time to move on from him.
To say England are poorly managed is a big harsh on the extremely new set-up.
Downton has been in only a few months.
Moores a few weeks.
There is a slow and steady change of management structure.
Until you give it a good chance, how can you say what is or is not a good structure?
-
KP a (nearly) 34 year old batsman with a dodgy knee and an over-inflated ego that did not want to just play tests.
A man who wanted to play T20s to keep his IPL price up?
There are what, 6 new faces in the team over the last few months.
Stokes will be back after a game or two and either Plunkett or Jordan will make way (depending who performs better).
Buttler was not 1st choice for Somerset, so needs a few games under his belt for Lancashire to be fair. I would think Prior for these three tests vs SL and then go from there.
KP makes some good points, but it seems it is a bit late for it.
Time to move on from him.
To say England are poorly managed is a big harsh on the extremely new set-up.
Downton has been in only a few months.
Moores a few weeks.
There is a slow and steady change of management structure.
Until you give it a good chance, how can you say what is or is not a good structure?
Hue head coach changes.. The suits behind them don't.. There in lays the drama
-
Good read and pretty spot on in most parts. He doesn't mind giving himself a few pats on the back along the way... :D
The only thing I would disagree on is Giles. The ODI side performed so poorly under Giles, there was no way he could have been test coach.
-
Hue head coach changes.. The suits behind them don't.. There in lays the drama
Head coach changed
Chief Exec changed
Coaching staff changed
Selectors changed
Players changed
So it is the admin's fault that England did poorly in Aus over the winter?
And therefore it was the admin's fault that England were so good prior to that, winning on India, getting to number 1 in the world, etc.
-
Sponsors changed.
Give Waitrose a chance! :P
-
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/jun/10/the-spin-english-cricket-reluctant-embrace-unorthodox-talents (http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/jun/10/the-spin-english-cricket-reluctant-embrace-unorthodox-talents)
THE OLD ORTHODOXIES
“A coach,” the batsman said, “must be careful not to cramp a lad’s style, not to repress his individuality.” His voice was soft, and he spoke English with an inflection that betrayed the fact he had been born and raised abroad. “One boy may show signs of steadiness, another of hard-hitting, another may have a tendency towards fast-scoring methods. A good coach will develop each player along natural lines.” The audience listened in appreciative silence, appropriate for a man of his skills and standing.
There had been controversy when he was first selected for England, but he had quietened it when, in his first series, he scored that brilliant 150 in the fourth innings against Australia. Now, most accepted that he was the best batsman in the country. Or at least the most brilliant, capable of incredible shots of his own design, the likes of which other, more orthodox, more English, batsmen, scarcely imagined, much less attempted. He continued. “If a young player showed a particular knack for a dangerous stroke, then he shouldn’t be discouraged from playing it, far less forced to abandon it. But he should be shown how to make it safer.” He spoke in particular of the pull, and the hook, which he had used so wonderfully well against the Australian quicks.
There were mutters of disagreement at that. And if the murmurers were too polite to raise their voices, they were gratified to read a rebuttal of his words in The Times the next day. “His play, as everyone who has seen him knows, is not English play,” the paper said. The pull and the hook, the paper advised, “are dangerous eccentricities which should not be recommended to the young.” Furthermore, “a lad may excuse himself for ending a pentameter verse with an adjective by the plea that Ovid sometimes does the same, and the master’s well-known answer is ‘when you have written as many and as good verses as Ovid, you may imitate him in breaking the rules.’ A cricket coach should in our opinion say much the same to a boy who tried to pull an off-ball or hook a straight one.”
Which is the giveaway, if you hadn’t yet twigged, that this conversation took place a long time ago; 117 years back, to be exact, when Ranjitsinhji published his Jubilee Book of Cricket. But it echoed again this week. Among the many little insights included in Kevin Pietersen’s debut column in the Daily Telegraph were a couple of snippets about the academy he is planning to open in Dubai. These were, presumably, included at his behest, part of the voracious PR campaign being waged by his management team, but they still contained a few pithy observations about English cricket.
“My guiding principles are that I want to coach kids the way they play and not from a textbook. You want kids to grow up believing in their own natural talent and strengths,” Pietersen explained. “I have seen how coaching is now, especially for kids. Ball on a cone, high elbow and hit through the ball. In my opinion that is not the only way to coach and it’s holding back some natural talent. The game has changed and coaching has to change too.”
The comparison he made was with Lasith Malinga. “How the hell does he get wickets bowling like that? But his technique works for him. If he was a young England player he would probably have drifted out of the game.” Which is not such a piece of what-iffery as it first appears. Perhaps the last really unorthodox English bowler to appear on the county circuit, the off-spinner Maurice Holmes, is now playing for Cannock in Division Three of the Birmingham Premier League, far away from the county scene.
“There will always be the English view, that something different is not necessarily something good,” Holmes told me in 2012. “There are people who tend to take the traditional view that things can and should only be done in one way.” He too has his forebears. Bernard Bosanquet, who perfected the googly, said that his delivery had been “subject to ridicule, abuse, contempt, and incredulity” in its early years. When he bowled the great Arthur Shrewsbury with one, the batsman told him the delivery was “unfair”. “Not unfair, Arthur,” Bosanquet said with a grin, “only immoral.”
Curiously, Kumar Sangakkara has also compared Pietersen to Malinga, telling Wisden Extra: “For us, it’s been like that with Lasith Malinga. He is very different in the way he looks, and as a person. Not everyone gets on well with each other in a team. There are certain people you might not have dinner with, but that doesn’t take away from the fact they will be valuable players in a national cause, going out trying to win matches.” Sri Lanka, of course, have done a far better job of nurturing, and integrating, players with unorthodox techniques, from Malinga to Murali to Ajantha Mendis, even Sanath Jayasuriya.
Too many people in English cricket tend to criticise unorthodox players for what they don’t do, rather than celebrate them for what they can do. Hence the recent fuss about Saeed Ajmal’s action, though the rest of the world has long since accepted him. Some seem to think that anyone who bowls with a bent elbow is a villain, regardless of whether or not they straighten it, and even though we now know that all bowlers flex their arms, which is why we have the 15 degree rule. But then, on these shores even traditional leg-spin still seems to be an unfathomable and alien skill.
The question of English approach towards unorthodox talent is growing more pressing. The current generation is the first to have grown up playing, and watching, T20, a format that encourages an irregular, even radical, approach. And yet we seem reluctant to embrace our most luminous talents. Alex Hales is, incredibly, unable to get into the ODI side. We dither about whether Jos Buttler’s wicket-keeping is up to snuff, worry whether Eoin Morgan has issues with his defence outside off-stump. Moeen Ali is yet to even use the doosra, which he says he has learned, in a match.
Not all young players have the bullet-proof self-belief that enabled Pietersen to overcome the doubts, the disapproval, and forge his own way ahead. They need to be fostered, supported, by those around them. But Buttler, for instance, even seems to have swallowed the idea that he’s not yet good enough to play Test cricket. As Pietersen says, “the game has changed”, but have our attitudes?
-
The difference with the Sri Lankans mentioned is they are playing for their country. I know it's an old argument but deep down I don't know how players that just walk away from their country can have the same support amongst team mates, not talking about children moving with families but adults making a choice. It has to be an issue.
-
The difference with the Sri Lankans mentioned is they are playing for their country. I know it's an old argument but deep down I don't know how players that just walk away from their country can have the same support amongst team mates, not talking about children moving with families but adults making a choice. It has to be an issue.
In hte modern world, I suspect that that point is rather more debateable than it might at first appear!
-
typical Pietersen - a self serving bullsh*t article with the occasional valid point.
Buttler is an exciting talent but Prior has been consistently one of the best keeper-batsmen in world cricket for 5 years. if he's fit he's the man in possession of the gloves.
Giles didn't get the job because he fluffed his lines in the audition, i refuse to believe there's a hidden agenda.
And as for KP himself - his departure from every setup he's ever been involved in has been celebrated. Controversy follows him wherever he goes and he clearly rubs people up the wrong way. Those of you saying England should learn to manage him; they have clearly tried over the years and got to the point where it's just not worthwhile anymore. He's over the hill and living on former glories, so it's a bold move for the selectors to cut him loose and focus on developing the team of the future.
In my humble opinion.
-
First and foremost - KP should be still be playing for England. However...
IN professional sport, its not as simple as 'turn up, get on with it and play.' Cricket is unique in its length of tours and its team and individual aspects. Its no good comparing cricketers to other team sports pros in terms of their ability to get on with other players. Cole and Sheringham, for example, only had to put up with each other for a couple of nights, at most, on Euro duty. Cricketers are in each others pockets for months. You have to take into account group cohesion and team dynamics. The very reason Nasri hasn't been selected for France's World Cup team is that they can't take a disruptive character away for a month-6 weeks. This isn't Championship Manager - you can't simply select the best players and stick them out there. Confidence, performance in social groups, etc all play a big part.
My question is; rather than jumping on a press and media bandwagon - explain how do you manage a player like KP? Or someone like him in your workplace? Imagine someone criticising the boss, who's been successful and given you a career - how do you react? he's the best worker in your office, but he's criticising the new guy, or the office junior - do you laugh along with him, follow his example? Does it affect the way you work? Does it create an atmosphere? Is he affecting the behaviour of the younger, impressionable lads? Is it affecting other workers performance?
What do you think when he's the only one not wearing a shirt or tie? The one who takes a different lunch to everyone else? What about when you hear that he did the same things in his previous jobs?
The point is, it starts to affect you. And you get to go home at 5pm every night. I know how I'd feel if I was Alastair Cook; you've backed the guy and stood up for him and he lets you down a year on when you really need him.
I think as an individual, out in the middle, him against 11 players, he's indispensible. Unfortunately, that only takes up a small part of the England cricketer. Its the tam stuff he doesn't do. And when one player becomes bigger than the team, he has to go. It happens across sports all the time, you've got to maintain the bigger picture and the foundations for successful team sport. Losing one, however talented, to preserve the many and the team culture is everything.
-
Why's he not playing for Surrey in the CC this week?
-
He is too busy taking the piss out of the Sun Cricket correspondence...
And am not sure that Jason Roy (who would have had to make way) would have been too happy about that.
regardless is scored a 55 ball hundred which KP hasn't done in a County Championship game...
-
jamielsn15, I thought that was a great comment.
I personally am a massive Pietersen fan. But at the end of the day if he is no longer a part of group and having a negative effect then in my opinion its better to cut your losses and move on.
Obviously he is a fantastic player and the decision to move on without him will not have been made lightly, but like you said there are so many other factors to consider other than just ability.
I play cricket with a guy who has more talent than I personally could ever wish to possess. He's the kind of bloke who is just good at stuff without having to try.
The problem is his attitude stinks and he is so arrogant that he won't listen to anyone else.
One of the big problems we have is the younger players coming through have started to think that the way he behaves is the norm and acceptable.
My personal belief is that as a senior player comes the responsibility to set a good example. In previous years there were a number of senior players who encouraged and maintained a good team atmosphere. This, to some extent allowed the team to carry some of his negative influence, but over time as these players retired and moved on that stability has diminished.
He himself is now become a senior player and even tried his hand at captaincy, which I might add was a disaster and even caused a number of people to leave the club.
Is any of this sounding familiar!
In the end we have had to move on without him and while initially this effected results, you can already see the positive effect it is having in the dressing room.
People are enjoying playing again and its about the collective team rather than anyone individual. I know to be successful in any sport there is a certain amount of single mindedness required, but cricket is still a team sport which requires 11 players working together.
In summary what I am saying is that, No single player is bigger than the club or an organisation and when that happens something need to be change. To me that is what has happened with Pietersen.
I have loved watching Pietersen play for England and it saddens me to know it wont happen again. For me he was one of the reasons I got back into cricket around the time of the 2005 ashes.
He's the kind of player who inspires people, but again thats only the side we see on the pitch and maybe thats for the best. As some of you will no doubt know from personal experience some elite sportsmen/women aren't all that nice people. For us as spectators who have no idea what goes on behind closed doors, its easy to say that the ECB made the wrong decision. I personally think we'll never get to the full truth behind the real reason for his axing but perhaps we should except that he's had a great run and finished up as one of the best and most successful players to pull on the England shirt.
-
I think most teams have a player that is arrogant and has a bad attitude. Some are more arrogant than others. Some people deal with them better than others but it could be their personality is their main weakness and it affects the team as well. It is just the way people are and if people can't tolerate that, the problem will be attempted to be solved, and if not, the person will part with the team.
-
Pietersen is enormous talent with a very big ego. England milked that till his knees gave up. Inability to handle him is the weakness from Coach/Captain point of view. Just too sad as a cricket fan to not see him anymore playing at the top level. Recently concluded Eng-Srilanka series was one of the most lackluster series till ofcourse Mathews decided to spice it up a bit. What's Cricket without characters and a bit of fire.
-
Typically when you have someone with an ego - you need to bring them into the decision making process make them feel important and loved.
It isn't that hard.
People like KP get grumpy when they see issues that are easily rectified but are being ignored by the management, or if they don't see improvement or change to help improvement.
-
WHat for me is far more interesting is that Vaughan had very few issues with managing KP. Strauss, even after the SA textgate affair, appeared to be able to manage KP. Cook has never been able to do this. I think it suggests that while Cook is a good batsman, he's maybe not the man-manager that other captains have been.
-
I agree that players with big egos need to be made to feel involved. KP cut a forlorn figure in Australia as he wasn't involved in the decision making process out on the pitch. I would have made him vice-captain. Cook may have benefit from his ideas and sometimes a quiet one / loud one combination can work well with captaincy and vice captaincy.
Looking at the England top 6 for the Sri Lanka game...KP would definitely be worth a place, I still think he had plenty to offer at the top level.
-
I was hoping that after the Ashes (before KP was dropped) that he would be brought into a vice captain position.
Cook is very defensive as a captain, KP could provide attacking advice to the table during a game. It gives KP the responsibility to manage his ego and keep him in check.