A couple of months ago, just prior to the early season Test series with the West Indies, English cricket had seemed so rosy. Flying high in all formats and, crucially, number one in the world in Test match cricket. The squad was harmonious, and aside from the perennial issue of playing spin on the sub-continent, the only question mark was which of England's embarrassment of riches would take the seamer spot, or spots, alongside James Anderson, Graeme Swann and Stuart Broad. At this stage, in early May, there were few signs hinting at what lie ahead for English cricket and, to an extent, world cricket.
Captain Strauss declared he would not be resigning the captaincy any time soon, and thus, wouldn't be conforming to Graeme Smith's uncanny knack of having removed the previous two England captains, Michael Vaughan and Nasser Hussain, from their posts. Strauss had had a rough 18 months with the bat, with, before the West Indies series, his only century coming against the Aussies in the Ashes triumph at Brisbane. However, few were calling for his head at this point. After all, this was arguably the most successful England captain ever. A world number one ranking, back to back Ashes victories and a fantastic partnership between himself and Andy Flower, the coach.
Kevin Pietersen is Kevin Pietersen. Any self-respecting cricket fan knows what you get with Kevin Pietersen. You get ego, you get stubbornness, but most of all, you get natural raw talent. A natural raw talent which helped, firstly, England to regain the Ashes in 2005 with a magnificent 158 to take the game away from the Australians. You then get natural raw talent which helped win England their first limited overs world trophy, the World t20 in 2010, in which KP was crowned player of the tournament. And, most recently, you get natural raw talent which almost certainly saved England's bacon at Headingley with one of the finest innings you'll see in Test cricket, one that had newspaper writers and pundits salivating. However, 'that' press conference after the Test in Yorkshire perhaps opened the cracks that some had began to see emerge in this England team. Pietersen could not say that the third Test at Lord's would be his last or not. KP hinted at other issues too, saying it was 'hard being me playing for England' and that he was in 'discussions' with Andy Flower and that more would be revealed after the cricket was over. This, coupled with Pietersen's retirement from all limited overs cricket earlier in the summer clearly did not bode well. This bolt from the blue hinted at underlying problems, problems that would emerge later on, such as Pietersen's wish to retire only from ODI's but to continue playing for his country in Test match cricket and international T20's, something the ECB simply would not budge on, and rightly so. For players to pick and choose which games to play for their country in this way is unacceptable and sends completely the wrong message to every other cricketer. It is one thing to retire from limited overs cricket entirely, as many have done with no problems at all, including Andrew Strauss, but quite another to attempt such a stunt as Pietersen did.
English cricket, despite the above, still appeared in decent shape going into the much anticipated series against South Africa, to show just who is the best Test side in the world. However, just as quickly as England's bowlers failing to deliver at The Oval, the tenuous harmony of the side was shattered. Media rumours emerged of derogatory text messages sent by that man again, Pietersen, to the opposition, particularly, ODI captain AB De Villiers and the best paceman in the world, Dale Steyn. Any sympathy Pietersen may have garnered instantly vanished upon these revelations. What more needs to be said on this issue? Pietersen was stupid beyond belief to do what he did and these messages, which has caused issues of 'trust and mutual respect' according to Andy Flower, could well prove the tipping point in Pietersen's career. In any other working environment, if an employee conferred key information to a rival firm or spoke badly of their colleague to someone outside of the company, they would be out. No second chances, that person would not return. Why should it be any different for KP? There should be no special treatment given to this man. England, in time, will find his replacement. Someone who'll be as good as, or better, than Pietersen. Cricket, and life, goes on. The ECB and the game is bigger than one player and always will be. The authorities cannot put this at risk and stoop down to football's level of 'player power' by letting England's star batsman return to the fold. His actions and his actions alone have caused this scenario. England has been good to KP and KP has been good to England, but, as a collective, English cricket cannot allow scandals like this and for that reason, KP should be disposed of. If Pietersen wants to join his mate Chris Gayle and become a t20 mercenary, then so be it, England should not stand in his way. However, Pietersen must look at himself too. Would he prefer a Bangladesh Premier League runner up medal and an Australian Big Bash trophy to another Ashes victory? If the answer to Pietersen, or any cricketer for that matter, is 'yes', then the game of cricket is in a lot of trouble. But who can blame the players? No one reading this would reject the chance of untold millions for a short stint in a warm country playing cricket for a couple of weeks. But tradition and history must stand firm over the current trend of t20, for Test cricket must always remain the ultimate aim for every cricketer, no, as in football, to make as much money as possible in the shortest time possible.
Life must go on post-KP however, and post-Strauss, following his resignation (and who can blame him after this most tumultuous of summers?). County cricket is full of promising middle-order batsmen to fill the void. James Taylor and Jonny Bairstow have just begun their Test careers, whilst youngsters James Vince, Joe Root and Alex Hales are touted for the future. Also, the likes of Eoin Morgan and Craig Kieswetter must still be considered for the role. However, the real problem lies in finding Alastair Cook an opening partner. It is an issue I've raised over the last couple of years as there appears to be no real plan from the ECB. Some pundits have talked of moving up Trott or Bell to open, but why move cricketers who have performed so well in their respective positions over the years? For me, only a new face will do. But who? No one truly impresses in county cricket at the moment. Nick Compton has had an outstanding season for Somerset, but is not really an opening batsman, whilst England could, and perhaps should, turn to Michael Carberry, who played a single Test over 3 years ago in Bangladesh. A fantastic athlete and, on his day, capable of great performances, but at the age of 32 and becoming ever more injury prone, is he the man to turn to? What is for sure is that the ECB have a lot of thinking to do and that England must now look ahead to next summer's Ashes and create a settled contented side. With or without KP.
No comments:
Post a Comment