Pietersen V Smith

[GIMH]

What happens if you remove minnows?

KP hasn't had a 'peak' yet either.

I know some people think he's 'finished'.

I don't.

 

[Sir Alex]

Smith - 6265 @ 47.82, 17 100s
Pietersen- 4833 @ 47.85, 16 100s

I see you got a point there GIMH.

 

[GIMH]

Haha it's close hey

Surprised KP's goes down though as I don't remember him doing anything of note against the minnows, itstl

 

[four_or_six]

An update (runs, average, 100s)

Kevin - 5175, 48.82, 16
Smith - 7170, 50.49, 21

And age is also on Smith's side (29 vs 30). Smith's figures are scary, assuming he goes through the same peak that great batsmen do (ie around their thirties), he could end up with runs comparable to Tendulkar's.

It is a shame that KP should be in that peak too at the moment, but he's only scored one hundred in the last 18 months (21 matches). That's less than any other 'permanent' England batsman.

I totally don't think he's finished, but at what point do you have to leave him out of the team because everyone else is performing better? I dunno... hopefully he scores some good runs this series and it doesn't matter. But if he doesn't, it's tough to drop another guy who has performed better just because he's 'not KP'.

 

[Furball]

At the moment he's in both sides purely because he's Kevin Pietersen. Bell and Shah have both been dropped from the ODI side in the last year/18 months, despite arguably being better than Pietersen in that form of the game based on how England's players have performed since the World Cup, and if Morgan and Trott continue in their good form, one of Morgan, Trott and Bell will miss out in the first Ashes Test, despite all having a better case for inclusion than Pietersen.

 

[Avada Kedavra]

KP is easily the more talented of the two.I would rather have Smith in my team though,because he is far more likely to play an innings of substance under pressure.

 

[four_or_six]

At the moment he's in both sides purely because he's Kevin Pietersen. Bell and Shah have both been dropped from the ODI side in the last year/18 months, despite arguably being better than Pietersen in that form of the game based on how England's players have performed since the World Cup, and if Morgan and Trott continue in their good form, one of Morgan, Trott and Bell will miss out in the first Ashes Test, despite all having a better case for inclusion than Pietersen.

I'm not sure about that. I don't know who we'd play today if KP was dropped, Bopara I presume. And I'm not sure KP is only ahead of Bopara in the pecking order because he's KP.

And in the ODI side, perhaps Bell has been unlucky, but I'd have the current KP ahead of Shah ten times out of ten. Shah was a disaster area, he cost us about two wickets a game with a combination of disasterous running and comical fielding.

 

[Furball]

I'm not sure about that. I don't know who we'd play today if KP was dropped, Bopara I presume. And I'm not sure KP is only ahead of Bopara in the pecking order because he's KP.

And in the ODI side, perhaps Bell has been unlucky, but I'd have the current KP ahead of Shah ten times out of ten. Shah was a disaster area, he cost us about two wickets a game with a combination of disasterous running and comical fielding.

Assuming Bell was fit, you could go with a top 6 of Strauss, Cook, Trott, Collingwood, Bell, Morgan in the Test side, and Morgan's relative inexperience aside, the only other argument for fitting KP into the line up is that he's KP.

Batting records | One-Day Internationals | Cricinfo Statsguru | Cricinfo.com

He's been poor in ODIs for a long time now. That sort of form simply wouldn't have been tolerated from players not called Kevin Pietersen.

 

[tooextracool]

Why does everyone keep putting Trott down as a number 3? He doesnt bat 3 for his county and hes failed for England whilst he been pushed up the order in tests. Should be batting at 5 or 6.

 

[four_or_six]

Why does everyone keep putting Trott down as a number 3? He doesnt bat 3 for his county and hes failed for England whilst he been pushed up the order in tests. Should be batting at 5 or 6.

Trott is at three because that's where he pretty much always bats for England, and if he plays I'm sure that's where he'll be. He's only played one match at 5 and none at 6 so you can't really read anthing into that.

 

[slowfinger]

What county does K.P play for?

 

[popepouri]

I remember Smith went through a time when he went without a ton for 15 tests.

 

[Pothas]

At the moment he's in both sides purely because he's Kevin Pietersen. Bell and Shah have both been dropped from the ODI side in the last year/18 months, despite arguably being better than Pietersen in that form of the game based on how England's players have performed since the World Cup, and if Morgan and Trott continue in their good form, one of Morgan, Trott and Bell will miss out in the first Ashes Test, despite all having a better case for inclusion than Pietersen.

That is a pretty big if and is also assumes Pietersen will continue on his current form.

Trott had a horrible winter, worse than Pietersen himself. One huge score against Bangladesh does not mean he is more worthy of a spot than Pietersen.

Lets wait for this summer to end before fretting about Pietersen and the ashes, will make runs at some point in this series I rekon.

 

[tooextracool]

Trott is at three because that's where he pretty much always bats for England, and if he plays I'm sure that's where he'll be. He's only played one match at 5 and none at 6 so you can't really read anthing into that.

Yes and thats pretty much always been a mistake by England. The only reason he bats at 3 is because Bell has been a failure there in the past, Collingwood isn't capable of it and KP thinks he's way above everyone else in the team that he gets to bat in his most favored position.

 

[Uppercut]

KP's having a bit of a tough run. Smith hasn't been anywhere near his best in ages either but he seems to be working through his poor form a bit better than KP.

I don't think my opinion on this has changed that much, I'd still take Smith. Not that either exactly grow on trees but an opener that averages around 50 is generally harder to find than a number 4 that averages around 50.

 

[four_or_six]

Yes and thats pretty much always been a mistake by England. The only reason he bats at 3 is because Bell has been a failure there in the past, Collingwood isn't capable of it and KP thinks he's way above everyone else in the team that he gets to bat in his most favored position.

Who would you bat at 3?

 

[Kylez]

Smith.

In the better form, more consistent and probably better when the pressure is on and against left arm spinners.