It's Tough Being Me - The Kevin Pietersen Story

[Shri]

Nah... KP has to talk the way certain posters at CW want him to talk... So yeah, he is not allowed to say sensible stuff

Well, this is a **** post.

I don't know about you sledger but the ****ing tongue at the end of every passive aggressive post is what gets me. I ignore the content because it hasn't been enlightening once over the years and its not going to begin now.

 

[Jono]

He can do what he wants, but:

1. Talking about how he still wants into the team at the same time as writing about any member of that team's specific weaknesses is nonsense, how could anyone pretend otherwise
2. It's a vicious circle isn't it? Had he kept his mouth shut before, he'd have had a lot more people on his side, and who knows might have been more likely to earn a recall. And here we go again

I've zero issue with anyone who wants to write about what's wrong with the England team if they have no desire to be part of it. If Ravi Bopara wrote that piece and padded it out with 'I still hope to be recalled' I would say exactly the same. He's a doos.

Yeah, this isn't an unreasonable view, but the difference is Bopara hasn't been told he's never allowed back. But I still get where you are coming from.

 

[Jono]

So that makes it the right thing to do?

sledging Twatto is never wrong

 

[GIMH]

sledging Twatto is never wrong

Well done his is a Jono post I can get on board with

 

[Shady Slim]

i know it is oversimplifying the issue but is there anyone here that would rather lose without him and not win with him?

 

[honestbharani]

I don't know about you sledger but the ****ing tongue at the end of every passive aggressive post is what gets me. I ignore the content because it hasn't been enlightening once over the years and its not going to begin now.

Oh yeah... troll tag team FTL.. And FTR, my posts make sense to non-trolls, so not surprised really...

 

[Dan]

Cut it out, all of you.

 

[morgieb]

i know it is oversimplifying the issue but is there anyone here that would rather lose without him and not win with him?

A couple of English posters admitted as much IIRC.

 

[Burgey]

I think there's a difference between Clarke in a commentary box saying Watson has a problem playing around his front pad to a bloke saying you can't play a short ball. There's something about saying a bloke can't play a bouncer that's more deprecating IMO, for these reasons:

1. There is often the undercurrent of there being a element of cowardice. Not fair, but there is.

2. There's the risk of physical harm if blokes try to exploit that weakness. Again, there's alwayss a risk of harm in cricket, but to me there's something more pitiable about seeing Michael Bevan pop up a short one to gully from a Gough or Caddick bouncer than seeing Watson go lbw for the fifth time in a row.

3. (Related to 2). It makes you look like a subcontinental batsman if you're helpless against bouncers, and that's a terrible sleight.

 

[harsh.ag]

I think there's a difference between Clarke in a commentary box saying Watson has a problem playing around his front pad to a bloke saying you can't play a short ball. There's something about saying a bloke can't play a bouncer that's more deprecating IMO, for these reasons:

1. There is often the undercurrent of there being a element of cowardice. Not fair, but there is.

2. There's the risk of physical harm if blokes try to exploit that weakness. Again, there's a Keats a risk of harm in cricket, but to me there's something more pitiable about seeing Michael Bevan pop up a short one to gully from a Gough or Caddick bouncer than seeing Watson go lbw for the fifth time in a row.

3. (Related to 2). It makes you look like a subcontinental batsman if you're helpless against bouncers, and that's a terrible sleight.

No such word as subcontinental. Can only infer you're referring to Australia, the nubbin that has been subbin as a continent for years, in which case, yeah, it's a terrible sleight.

 

[marc71178]

He did what he was asked to do and was still ignored.

You see that's the real problem. Firstly he was never officially asked to do that, it was a comment from someone with at the point no say in the matter.

Secondly, he did come back to county cricket but literally only had one good innings. It'd be a different matter if he'd hit 4 or 5 tons in the games he'd played but the fact of the matter is he didn't.

 

[harsh.ag]

MVP bitches

The Professional Cricketers' Association

 

[wpdavid]

MVP bitches

The Professional Cricketers' Association

Comedy gold. Against a side that hadn't won a CC game for years and he still needed to be dropped however many times it was.

 

[harsh.ag]

Comedy gold. Against a side that hadn't won a CC game for years and he still needed to be dropped however many times it was.

Yeah, obviously not well versed with FCA. Poor stuff.

 

[Cruxdude]

You see that's the real problem. Firstly he was never officially asked to do that, it was a comment from someone with at the point no say in the matter.

Secondly, he did come back to county cricket but literally only had one good innings. It'd be a different matter if he'd hit 4 or 5 tons in the games he'd played but the fact of the matter is he didn't.

I know we are never going to agree on this but when a player of KPs pedigree scores 350+ it means he is back. You do not apply the standards you apply to any other player to these guys. But anyway no point in talking about this any further. You guys do not want him and no one else can have him.

 

[King Pietersen]

I'd love to have him back. Thing is though, it's not going to happen, so I'm bored of reading about him saying he wants back in. Strauss has openly called him a ****, there's no way he's getting back in to this England set-up. Also, it's not like he was plundering runs before he got sacked again. He was our leading scorer in Australia, but that's hardly anything to shout about, not like he was averaging 50+. He not averaged over 50 in Tests in a calendar year since 2011 and in his last 5 years of ODi's he averaged 33.88. He's also ridiculously injury prone. Has had issues with his hamstring, knee and achilles in recent years, and just missed a couple of Surrey games through injury. I'd love to see KP back playing for England purely through fanboyism, but one score of 300+ against Leicestershire in Division 2 doesn't erase 5 years of mediocrity, injury proneness, and 3 years of burnt bridges. KP will never play for England again.

 

[Niall]

I'd love to have him back. Thing is though, it's not going to happen, so I'm bored of reading about him saying he wants back in. Strauss has openly called him a ****, there's no way he's getting back in to this England set-up. Also, it's not like he was plundering runs before he got sacked again. He was our leading scorer in Australia, but that's hardly anything to shout about, not like he was averaging 50+. He not averaged over 50 in Tests in a calendar year since 2011 and in his last 5 years of ODi's he averaged 33.88. He's also ridiculously injury prone. Has had issues with his hamstring, knee and achilles in recent years, and just missed a couple of Surrey games through injury. I'd love to see KP back playing for England purely through fanboyism, but one score of 300+ against Leicestershire in Division 2 doesn't erase 5 years of mediocrity, injury proneness, and 3 years of burnt bridges. KP will never play for England again.

Its probably to late to be picked for The Ashes bar a epidemic breaks out, but they could do a lot worse than picking one of the few English players with any t20 experience outside England for the world cup next year. He won't have to interact with Cook either.

 

[honestbharani]

Also, to Marc's point, he WAS told that if he scores runs, he will be considered. It is on record and you can google it up all you want. There was an interview by Colin Graves to that effect and he was the president when the decision to actually not consider him for selection was made. And KP made it clear from his column that he was not expecting to walk in back to the team, 350 odd notwithstanding. If his expectation was just that he be in the selectors' radar should a vacancy arise, it was hardly something wrong from his side. I have no idea how people find a way to make it as though he is in the wrong even in this instance. That is my whole point here. If he is not going to be considered by this management, then fine, it is their decision. I think it is a wrong and bad decision but they are the ones paid to make those decisions. It is just that it was handled so so poorly and went against everything that these guys apparently promise to English cricket. I will start with Integrity before even Trust, but that's just me.

 

[GIMH]

Also, to Marc's point, he WAS told that if he scores runs, he will be considered. It is on record and you can google it up all you want. There was an interview by Colin Graves to that effect and he was the president when the decision to actually not consider him for selection was made. And KP made it clear from his column that he was not expecting to walk in back to the team, 350 odd notwithstanding. If his expectation was just that he be in the selectors' radar should a vacancy arise, it was hardly something wrong from his side. I have no idea how people find a way to make it as though he is in the wrong even in this instance. That is my whole point here. If he is not going to be considered by this management, then fine, it is their decision. I think it is a wrong and bad decision but they are the ones paid to make those decisions. It is just that it was handled so so poorly and went against everything that these guys apparently promise to English cricket. I will start with Integrity before even Trust, but that's just me.

Nothing you've just said contradicts what Marc said. I suggest you read his post again.

 

[honestbharani]

You see that's the real problem. Firstly he was never officially asked to do that, it was a comment from someone with at the point no say in the matter.

Secondly, he did come back to county cricket but literally only had one good innings. It'd be a different matter if he'd hit 4 or 5 tons in the games he'd played but the fact of the matter is he didn't.

"Officially" is just a cop out.. The guy giving the word was the ECB President for all intents and purposes and he was the President when it was decided to not pick him.. And I may be wrong here, but he only played like 4 games and had a 100, 300 and another 50 odd in those... Decent enough form when the player has the pedigree of a KP IMO... And thirdly, Marc, are you seriously suggesting if he had scored 100+ every time he batted, he would have been recalled? That is just not true, right?