Congratulations KP

[Pothas]

Is it just KP's inventiveness that makes him so much more watchable than Amla or Clarke? All three are perfectly capable of the bat**** crazy counterattacking 150 out of nowhere.

That Amla knock at Perth was actually fairly ridiculous, I mean I know it was only John Hastings but he was just taking the piss. Personally I don't think KP is really any better to watch that either of those two, all three are fantastic value in different ways.

 

[Pothas]

Not half as often, though.

I prefer watching KP because he's less orthodox, and because there's a kind of physical brutality to his batting, same as Hayden had. KP bats like he's squaring up to a bouncer, whereas Clarke bats like he's painting a picture. And the fact that he constantly perpetuates off-field drama often means that his innings form part of a bigger story arc, and every hundred seems like a defiant "**** you" to whoever he's recently been publicly disagreeing with.

I certainly enjoy the sight of a KP ton more than a Clarke one, mainly because he plays for England plus the seacond reason you mention, but I don't think Clarke is quite that cerebral, some of those shots in his 300 against India were pretty bloody violent.

 

[GuyFromLancs]

I can't help but think he's still underachieved to a certain extent. He has a higher ceiling than anyone I have ever watched bat, the way he has casually destroyed great bowlers (Murali, Warne, Mcgrath, Steyn) is unlike anyone I've ever seen. But he's also mixed it with long spells of nothingness and poor form.

Still, great career and a joy to watch.

You could argue it adds to the enigma. Frustrating as it often is

 

[Black_Warrior]

Lol let's not go (KP) nuts here, he's not better than Amla atm, and probably not better than sangakkara chanderpaul and a few others

Statistically? Yes Amla, Sangakkara are quite ahead of KP.

However in my view in terms of ability I rank KP ahead of them. I have had this discussion a number of times on CW and I know the stats and figures don't back that up and I am ok with people not ranking him ahead as a result of that.

 

[Black_Warrior]

I can't help but think he's still underachieved to a certain extent. He has a higher ceiling than anyone I have ever watched bat, the way he has casually destroyed great bowlers (Murali, Warne, Mcgrath, Steyn) is unlike anyone I've ever seen. But he's also mixed it with long spells of nothingness and poor form.

Still, great career and a joy to watch.

Very well said.. Definitely an under acheiver..anyone who can toy with Murali, Warne, McGrath, Steyn should have been in terms of statistics miles ahead of the rest but its his own fault, coupled with off field factors and fitness issues.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

Great to watch (on and off the pitch) and a real match winner. Congrats KP on the 100 tests.

Was horrible against Ajmal and co though.

 

[Burgey]

There's always something compelling when you watch someone whose MO is a bit outrageous.

 

[Jono]

Good question actually. Probably the 3 you mention.

AFAIC Pietersen took the torch from Lara, who took it from Viv. As for who he'll pass the torch onto - if he can translate his ODI 'how the **** has he done that' innings into Test cricket, I'd say Virat Kohli is in pole position.

Would not mind Kohli positioning himself on my pole at all.

 

[Shri]

what's this?

Spending too much time with Malaysian hookers does that to you.

 

[OverratedSanity]

http://www.espncricinfo.com/blogs/content/story/690571.html

Quite an interesting question I think. A player of great innings is how many people might remember guys like VVS Laxman and Stan mccabe (sacrilegious but true) ... Rather than as genuine greats, which is kind if unfortunate because these players are so obviously special. If pietersen's average was a couple of points higher, it'd be above that 50 mark. I think more people would rate him higher

 

[Spark]

Blogs: Jon Hotten: Is KP a great player or a player of great innings? | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo

Quite an interesting question I think. If pietersen's average was a couple of points higher, it'd be above that 50 mark. I think more people would rate him higher

I get your point but this is borderline tautology

 

[OverratedSanity]

I get your point but this is borderline tautology

Knew it sounded that way, so I added Mccabe and Laxman as examples. It's possible KP could be remembered similarly

 

[wpdavid]

Knew it sounded that way, so I added Mccabe and Laxman as examples. It's possible KP could be remembered similarly

And I think it's a fair assessment. I was chatting about this with a mate last night, and we were both saying that he just doesn't give the air of permanence that you got from genuinely great batsmen like Ponting, Lara or SRT, where you really didn't think you were going to get them out if they made 50. No question that some of his innings have been astonishing, but he just isn't quite in that league.

 

[Jono]

And I think it's a fair assessment. I was chatting about this with a mate last night, and we were both saying that he just doesn't give the air of permanence that you got from genuinely great batsmen like Ponting, Lara or SRT, where you really didn't think you were going to get them out if they made 50. No question that some of his innings have been astonishing, but he just isn't quite in that league.

He's definitely not in the holy trio's league, but its **** like he did today that makes me question whether he's even as good as Amla and Cook tbh. Just unforgivable.

 

[Spark]

He's definitely not in the holy trio's league, but its **** like he did today that makes me question whether he's even as good as Amla and Cook tbh. Just unforgivable.

Yeah in the end I don't think you can rely on KP. He's brilliant, obvs but he isn't quite consistent/sensible enough to be your bedrock batsman, and someone with his class/talent really should be.

 

[Furball]

Yeah in the end I don't think you can rely on KP. He's brilliant, obvs but he isn't quite consistent/sensible enough to be your bedrock batsman, and someone with his class/talent really should be.

That's what you get with KP though.

There's 2 types of greatness: there's those whose best is better than anyone else's, and those who are consistent/less likely to put in a dud performance. KP's firmly in the former grouping, and they're simply far more thrilling to watch.

 

[Spark]

I'm still not totally convinced that the two are mutually exclusive.

 

[Cricketismylife]

Agree that KP is comparable to VVS. A player of great innings but not a great player, both have so many match turning performances but somehow were a bit too careless. Both also had unorthodox techniques, Laxman was great to watch for style Kp for destructiveness. KP has shown over his career his ability to score fast and leave England enough time to win test matches, but when England are up against it and fighting to draw he has shown an inability to survive long periods. The 33 off 220 Abdv type transformation is something he hasn't done much of.

I think of the trio mentioned KP is probably closest to Clarke, I think that Amla and Sangakkara are some way ahead of him.

 

[Jono]

Greatest batsman of his generation, bar none.

He's definitely not in the holy trio's league, but its **** like he did today that makes me question whether he's even as good as Amla and Cook tbh. Just unforgivable.

Does it again. Incredible.

You can play your Lords 2011, Mumbai 2012, Headingley 2012 etc. type knocks, but that just makes him a very good player capable of greatness. Definitely below Clarke for mine.

 

[ImpatientLime]

That average just keeps on plummeting.