It's Tough Being Me - The Kevin Pietersen Story

[uvelocity]

its pat howard anyway

 

[grecian]

Didn't he write some bad stuff about KP's captaincy while they were both still playing test cricket as team mates? I honestly think he has come off as a bigger **** than KP from whatever one can conclude from watching them during the cricket on TV...

Quite frankly I'm not sure I'd like to spend much time with either. Can't have been easy being an England cricketer for the last 10 years. Flintoff, probably a tad over-bearing too, as much as I love him.

The reason why Swann was castigated was Piers said stuff against him. The thing about these KP fanatics, is they like to think of themselves as individuals bucking against the establishment, yet all they seem to do is use arguments from a disgraced Tabloid editor, who spent a column this week defending a man who hacked the phones of anyone that he could get a news story off. Either Piers is talking **** about inside info, or he's getting it from KP. Either way it doesn't help this dead cause, except for these people who seem so invested they just can't let it lie.Now morgan slags off cook, prior, moores, downton, and they all follow behind like obedient little lap-dogs. Pathetic.

See that blog asked "what if it had been Kp who had called Strauss a ****?" A pointless what-if question he addressed at the people who don't much like KP. The point is I could ask the same Q to these KP-lovers. My guess is they'd say it was fair comment, he's not an England cricketer any more, Strauss probably is a ****. Almost exactly what has been said by people defending strauss. Yet maybe that wouldn't have happened because it's an utterly rhetorically irritating question.

Personally, I reckon it's pretty unprofessional, don't really think you should be using the word when mic'd up. Yet it's clear people are just using it to stir more problems, way out of proportion. That Blog, Morgan just boring trolling.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Quite frankly I'm not sure I'd like to spend much time with either. Can't have been easy being an England cricketer for the last 10 years. Flintoff, probably a tad over-bearing too, as much as I love him.

The reason why Swann was castigated was Piers said stuff against him. The thing about these KP fanatics, is they like to think of themselves as individuals bucking against the establishment, yet all they seem to do is use arguments from a disgraced Tabloid editor, who spent a column this week defending a man who hacked the phones of anyone that he could get a news story off. Either Piers is talking **** about inside info, or he's getting it from KP. Either way it doesn't help this dead cause, except for these people who seem so invested they just can't let it lie.Now morgan slags off cook, prior, moores, downton, and they all follow behind like obedient little lap-dogs. Pathetic.

See that blog asked "what if it had been Kp who had called Strauss a ****?" A pointless what-if question he addressed at the people who don't much like KP. The point is I could ask the same Q to these KP-lovers. My guess is they'd say it was fair comment, he's not an England cricketer any more, Strauss probably is a ****. Almost exactly what has been said by people defending strauss. Yet maybe that wouldn't have happened because it's an utterly rhetorically irritating question.

Personally, I reckon it's pretty unprofessional, don't really think you should be using the word when mic'd up. Yet it's clear people are just using it to stir more problems, way out of proportion. That Blog, Morgan just boring trolling.

Tory, int he?

Meanwhile, Stephen Brenkley of The Independent says England's true blue ex-skipper's language may have been regrettable, but his sentiment was a commonly held one.

In describing Pietersen as an “absolute c**t” in an off-air conversation with his fellow Sky commentator Nick Knight, Strauss was not issuing an exclusive opinion...The disdain inherent in the assessment, although followed by an embarrassed apology, brooks no debate and offers no room for manoeuvre. Strauss was merely echoing what so many, and probably most people once or still connected with the England team, feel about Pietersen.

 

[harsh.ag]

Should make this thread a sticky for now

 

[akilana]

KP gets along well with South African players. Must have stayed in SA and played for them. They were a KP and a spinner away from becoming a dominant team.

 

[Top_Cat]

Tory, int he?

Meanwhile, Stephen Brenkley of The Independent says England's true blue ex-skipper's language may have been regrettable, but his sentiment was a commonly held one.

FFS, seriously? Someone is really writing articles about why Strauss may be justified in calling Pietersen a **** like its relevant in any way?

Newsflash, England, all sportsmen are ****s. This is why England will never dominate a sport; the point of top-level sport is not to fill your team with non-****s, it's to find a way to make a team full of talented ****s work together for the greater good of beating all the other ****s.

 

[harsh.ag]

FFS, seriously? Someone is really writing articles about why Strauss may be justified in calling Pietersen a **** like its relevant in any way?

Newsflash, England, all sportsmen are ****s. This is why England will never dominate a sport; the point of top-level sport is not to fill your team with non-****s, it's to find a way to make a team full of talented ****s work together for the greater good of beating all the other ****s.

Schweinsteiger **** & Co. give this a thumbs up.

 

[BoyBrumby]

FFS, seriously? Someone is really writing articles about why Strauss may be justified in calling Pietersen a **** like its relevant in any way?

Newsflash, England, all sportsmen are ****s. This is why England will never dominate a sport; the point of top-level sport is not to fill your team with non-****s, it's to find a way to make a team full of talented ****s work together for the greater good of beating all the other ****s.

TBF a team full of ****s never worked out too well for our football team.

Although, having said that, the QFs of 2002 and 2006 look like wonderful waking comas right about now.

 

[harsh.ag]

TBF a team full of ****s never worked out too well for our football team.

Although, having said that, the QFs of 2002 and 2006 look like wonderful waking comas right about now.

Nah, they were the opposite ***'s genitals. That was the problem. May have worked out if they were c***s.

 

[GIMH]

I think the issue is not so much whether one is a **** but whether one is a **** that other ****s can tolerate.

In the case of the football team, the 02 and 06 team may not have been nice people but appeared to, by and large, tolerate each other. With 2010 this was not the case and suddenly performance drops.

Same goes here I'd say. I'm sure most of our team are ****s but KP is clearly a level above and the rest of the ****s even find him too much.

If that makes sense.

 

[Riggins]

Yeah Dave Warner's a good example. He's obviously a complete ****wit, but regardless the blokes within the team seem to like him okay.

 

[GIMH]

Have edited my post as I felt 'like' was a bit strong but yeah good example

 

[Adders]

I wonder if Andrew Strauss is aware that his faux pas has had such a poor impact on this family forum........none of us can string a sentence together without the word **** in it anymore.

Shame on you Andrew.........look what example you've set for us. Such a ****.

 

[Top_Cat]

It's not about how many ****s in the team or the size of ****entry in the ****. It's about how ****s, whether 1 or 11, are managed and the overarching goal of the team. The ECB would rather lose nice than win ugly. Have a look at this team;

1st Test: South Africa v Australia at Johannesburg, Feb 22-24, 2002 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

They were talented, yes, but so is KP. Swap KP with, say, Martyn and he'd average 60. Swap Warner with Robson now and he'd average 20.

There is no way in hell that KP is a bigger **** to deal with than any of the top-6 in that line-up yet they demolished all before them and, individually and collectively, utterly dominated. There were plenty of well-known skirmishes between various members during the time when they were smashing all around them. I might add KP was averaging 50+ in one of the winningest periods in English cricket history too. Something changed and I doubt it was him.

It's cultural.

EDIT: I will also say that KP should not have been allowed back in the side after his texts to the Saffers. That should have been the end of him right there and then.

 

[Spark]

Man, that top seven. Just ridiculous.

 

[vic_orthdox]

It's not about how many ****s in the team or the size of ****entry in the ****. It's about how ****s, whether 1 or 11, are managed and the overarching goal of the team. The ECB would rather lose nice than win ugly. Have a look at this team;

1st Test: South Africa v Australia at Johannesburg, Feb 22-24, 2002 | Cricket Scorecard | ESPN Cricinfo

They were talented, yes, but so is KP. Swap KP with, say, Martyn and he'd average 60. Swap Warner with Robson now and he'd average 20.

There is no way in hell that KP is a bigger **** to deal with than any of the top-6 in that line-up yet they demolished all before them and, individually and collectively, utterly dominated. There were plenty of well-known skirmishes between various members during the time when they were smashing all around them. I might add KP was averaging 50+ in one of the winningest periods in English cricket history too. Something changed and I doubt it was him.

It's cultural.

EDIT: I will also say that KP should not have been allowed back in the side after his texts to the Saffers. That should have been the end of him right there and then.

There was a far greater team ethos in that group, though. They all spent their time in the Test team battling their way in, as the junior, whereas KP walked in as a mature man, was put on a pedestal after his first series and could have (not saying that he did because obviously I was never around) gotten away with whatever he liked from the end of his fifth Test.

None of those players were booted out of two of their state sides, without even touching on what Pietersen in South Africa.

EDIT: even now, look at someone like Maxwell. Now he's a "knob" (harmless though), but when he gets out at bad times playing Pietersen-esque shots and talks about how he knows that he let the team down terribly, etc. He understands that he gets extra license, but he owes his team in return. KP has the license, but as an opposing fan I never got the feeling that I was watching a guy who felt like he understood that transaction, he did whatever he liked "because I can".

 

[social]

There was a far greater team ethos in that group, though. They all spent their time in the Test team battling their way in, as the junior, whereas KP walked in as a mature man, was put on a pedestal after his first series and could have (not saying that he did because obviously I was never around) gotten away with whatever he liked from the end of his fifth Test.

None of those players were booted out of two of their state sides, without even touching on what Pietersen in South Africa.

That group had leadership to keep everyone's mind on the job

Current English team doesn't appear to have any

 

[Top_Cat]

There was a far greater team ethos in that group, though. They all spent their time in the Test team battling their way in, as the junior, whereas KP walked in as a mature man, was put on a pedestal after his first series and could have (not saying that he did because obviously I was never around) gotten away with whatever he liked from the end of his fifth Test.

All true and he could have, sure. But didn't. Bloke averaged all but 50 in a winning period for the team and played almost 100 Tests, some of his knocks in some really tight situations. It doesn't really gel with KP being an unworkable member of the team, personally. We're all guessing, given (you less so, probably).

None of them were kicked out, yeah, but anyone who was around in the 90's knew blokes like Hayden weren't getting a go in the Test side because he's a ****wit. It was only because he was already in the set-up that he jagged a few Tests early whereas KP obviously had to wait until he qualified. Hayden, when he was finally picked after Blewwy was dropped was a fully-formed mature player. Would argue he and Martyn got in through weight of runs rather than outstanding team-man qualities.

The list of awkward characters the Aussie side has handled is pretty long yet they kept winning, is what I'm getting at. They were all humbled, though, by being dropped when it was too much, granted, as opposed to KP who was given the golden ticket. But that's the sort of thing I mean about KP being poorly handled. Was given enough rope to hang himself rather than being pulled up earlier.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Funnily enough, Pietersen was probably more successful and comfortable in a team with more "different/out there" characters - Vaughan, Flintoff, etc. When he was the odd one out I guess things turned.

 

[Jono]

What's this I hear about Graeme Smith tweeting KP an asking if the "head boy slipped up" or something similar?