The argument can be had as to whether he is good enough, when he is considered. The ECB have said they will not consider him so it is irrelevant. Mind you – given that fact, it is laughable that he wouldn’t get into the England side based on talent alone. The limited over sides in particular! Has anybody who thinks otherwise been watching them lately?
It needs somebody like Botham in charge. Get all the dissenters in a room and ask those who would kick up a stink if Pieterson is selected on merit to leave. As they are leaving tell the last of them to close the door. Would go a long way to getting England on the right track.
The problem was sacking him in the first place, after the last Ashes, as it made no sense,
Drop the guy by all means, but sacking him implied that he was the prime cause of the trouble, and that all would be sweetness and harmony without him. As I've said before, if one of our middle order batsmen gets injured during the Ashes, or loses form, it's daft to rule KP out.
The argument can be had as to whether he is good enough, when he is considered. The ECB have said they will not consider him so it is irrelevant. Mind you – given that fact, it is laughable that he wouldn’t get into the England side based on talent alone. The limited over sides in particular! Has anybody who thinks otherwise been watching them lately?
It needs somebody like Botham in charge. Get all the dissenters in a room and ask those who would kick up a stink if Pieterson is selected on merit to leave. As they are leaving tell the last of them to close the door. Would go a long way to getting England on the right track.
Like I said it is arguable he would get into the test side. As for the ODI squad, yes based on talent but do we really want someone playing for that side he in the past didn't want to?
so you want me to post a montage of all of his cock ups/drops because there will be plenty !?
Jeez, here we are with someone who is 5th in the all-time list of England run-getters and in top 20 of averages ever....and you want to have a pop at his fielding !!
The argument can be had as to whether he is good enough, when he is considered. The ECB have said they will not consider him so it is irrelevant. Mind you – given that fact, it is laughable that he wouldn’t get into the England side based on talent alone. The limited over sides in particular! Has anybody who thinks otherwise been watching them lately?
It needs somebody like Botham in charge. Get all the dissenters in a room and ask those who would kick up a stink if Pieterson is selected on merit to leave. As they are leaving tell the last of them to close the door. Would go a long way to getting England on the right track.
Like I said it is arguable he would get into the test side. As for the ODI squad, yes based on talent but do we really want someone playing for that side he in the past didn't want to?
I want to see England winning. The best way to achieve that is to have as many players of Pieterson's quality in the side - test and one day. I don't see the point in arguing whether he is good enough though, when the reason given has been lack of trust and not lack of ability. That is the point to challenge.
so you want me to post a montage of all of his cock ups/drops because there will be plenty !?
Jeez, here we are with someone who is 5th in the all-time list of England run-getters and in top 20 of averages ever....and you want to have a pop at his fielding !!
happy to do so ...its a sign of his inability to play as part of a team ...for example,.if a player makes say 60 runs per innings ,gives away 10 through misfields and drops someone who makes 40 then his contribution doesnt look so good and as i said before fielding is a 3rd of the game ....
The argument can be had as to whether he is good enough, when he is considered. The ECB have said they will not consider him so it is irrelevant. Mind you – given that fact, it is laughable that he wouldn’t get into the England side based on talent alone. The limited over sides in particular! Has anybody who thinks otherwise been watching them lately?
It needs somebody like Botham in charge. Get all the dissenters in a room and ask those who would kick up a stink if Pieterson is selected on merit to leave. As they are leaving tell the last of them to close the door. Would go a long way to getting England on the right track.
Like I said it is arguable he would get into the test side. As for the ODI squad, yes based on talent but do we really want someone playing for that side he in the past didn't want to?
I want to see England winning. The best way to achieve that is to have as many players of Pieterson's quality in the side - test and one day. I don't see the point in arguing whether he is good enough though, when the reason given has been lack of trust and not lack of ability. That is the point to challenge.
So why are people bringing up his ability if that isn't why he has been left out of the team? His behaviour is an even bigger issue than his form over the past few years, those defending him know that and is exactly why people are saying he should be there because he is "the best batsman we have" as there is very little to defend what he has done.
Bit if you brought him in with his 47 average at the expense of someone with a 35 average you might think great.
But then two of the batsman, dont feel comfortable playing with him and their average drops by 10 runs and the bowlers who he slated in his book drop their averages down and all of a sudden his 47 average is nowhere near making up what his inclusion has cost the rest of the team.
His performances in the test team were not particularly good the last year or so he played.
Fiery ? .. a nickname given to Fred Trueman that Boycott hijacked when he was trying to make a name for himself .. just as 'the corridor of uncertainty' is a Benaudism nicked by Boycott .. Boycott .. the great 'nicker' .. ((:>)
Fiery was given to Boycott by Brearley, Willis and Botham. The corridor of uncertainty was not nicked from Richie Benaud either.
source?
if my memory serves me right Boycott was referred to a "Fiery " by Brearley in the "Botham 1981 test series" it definitely mentioned in "phoenix from the ashes" and Willis and Botham went along with it
quite possibly .. but read my post re Trueman's nickname dating from the 1950s well BEFORE Boycott had hijacked Trueman's nickname for his own use .. and this is my last word on the topic .. Boycott may have been a decent batsman but as a person, he makes Pietersen look like St Francis of Assisi .. remember Boycott is a convicted woman beater, why the BBC continue to employ this dirtbag is beyond me
Fiery ? .. a nickname given to Fred Trueman that Boycott hijacked when he was trying to make a name for himself .. just as 'the corridor of uncertainty' is a Benaudism nicked by Boycott .. Boycott .. the great 'nicker' .. ((:>)
Fiery was given to Boycott by Brearley, Willis and Botham. The corridor of uncertainty was not nicked from Richie Benaud either.
source?
if my memory serves me right Boycott was referred to a "Fiery " by Brearley in the "Botham 1981 test series" it definitely mentioned in "phoenix from the ashes" and Willis and Botham went along with it
quite possibly .. but read my post re Trueman's nickname dating from the 1950s well BEFORE Boycott had hijacked Trueman's nickname for his own use .. and this is my last word on the topic .. Boycott may have been a decent batsman but as a person, he makes Pietersen look like St Francis of Assisi .. remember Boycott is a convicted woman beater, why the BBC continue to employ this dirtbag is beyond me
never really thought "fiery" was used as a serious sobriquet for anyone else than FST ,...wonder who d get thrown out an imaginary balloon first ....KP or GB ?
Fiery ? .. a nickname given to Fred Trueman that Boycott hijacked when he was trying to make a name for himself .. just as 'the corridor of uncertainty' is a Benaudism nicked by Boycott .. Boycott .. the great 'nicker' .. ((:>)
Fiery was given to Boycott by Brearley, Willis and Botham. The corridor of uncertainty was not nicked from Richie Benaud either.
source?
if my memory serves me right Boycott was referred to a "Fiery " by Brearley in the "Botham 1981 test series" it definitely mentioned in "phoenix from the ashes" and Willis and Botham went along with it
quite possibly .. but read my post re Trueman's nickname dating from the 1950s well BEFORE Boycott had hijacked Trueman's nickname for his own use .. and this is my last word on the topic .. Boycott may have been a decent batsman but as a person, he makes Pietersen look like St Francis of Assisi .. remember Boycott is a convicted woman beater, why the BBC continue to employ this dirtbag is beyond me
For goodness sake Boycott DID NOT NICK ANYONES NICKNAME! You don't give yourself nicknames, they are bestowed upon you by others. As I have said and has been backed up on here it was Brearley, Willis and Botham who called him Fiery along with other names such as Thatch. Yes Fred Trueman was known as Fiery Fred and also Sir Fred just as Boycott is often referred to as Sir Geoffrey.
Bit if you brought him in with his 47 average at the expense of someone with a 35 average you might think great.
But then two of the batsman, dont feel comfortable playing with him and their average drops by 10 runs and the bowlers who he slated in his book drop their averages down and all of a sudden his 47 average is nowhere near making up what his inclusion has cost the rest of the team.
His performances in the test team were not particularly good the last year or so he played.
Sums up my thoughts well.
People are treating it like he's Lara at his peak, whereas the reality is he might get marginally more runs than anyone he replaces but the hassle he'll bring will be bad for the team, and he'll replace someone younger who the experience will help more too.
The decision is the right one its just been handled badly.
Bit if you brought him in with his 47 average at the expense of someone with a 35 average you might think great.
But then two of the batsman, dont feel comfortable playing with him and their average drops by 10 runs and the bowlers who he slated in his book drop their averages down and all of a sudden his 47 average is nowhere near making up what his inclusion has cost the rest of the team.
His performances in the test team were not particularly good the last year or so he played.
Sums up my thoughts well.
People are treating it like he's Lara at his peak, whereas the reality is he might get marginally more runs than anyone he replaces but the hassle he'll bring will be bad for the team, and he'll replace someone younger who the experience will help more too.
The decision is the right one its just been handled badly.
This argument stacks up if the team is decent. At the moment it is crap so he is going to have more of an impact. And if the team is crap - I think it takes any member of that team's right away to be precious.
Bit if you brought him in with his 47 average at the expense of someone with a 35 average you might think great.
But then two of the batsman, dont feel comfortable playing with him and their average drops by 10 runs and the bowlers who he slated in his book drop their averages down and all of a sudden his 47 average is nowhere near making up what his inclusion has cost the rest of the team.
His performances in the test team were not particularly good the last year or so he played.
Sums up my thoughts well.
People are treating it like he's Lara at his peak, whereas the reality is he might get marginally more runs than anyone he replaces but the hassle he'll bring will be bad for the team, and he'll replace someone younger who the experience will help more too.
The decision is the right one its just been handled badly.
This argument stacks up if the team is decent. At the moment it is crap so he is going to have more of an impact. And if the team is crap - I think it takes any member of that team's right away to be precious.
But his average in 2013, the last time he was in the side, was 32 in Tests and 28 in ODIs. That simply isn't good enough and doesn't even compare to those currently in the side.
Meanwhile, on the road at the Oval, Leics managed 480. And in reply Surrey are 172-1 off 13.4 overs such is the threatening nature of an attack that hasn't won a game in over two years.
so you want me to post a montage of all of his cock ups/drops because there will be plenty !?
Jeez, here we are with someone who is 5th in the all-time list of England run-getters and in top 20 of averages ever....and you want to have a pop at his fielding !!
happy to do so ...its a sign of his inability to play as part of a team ...for example,.if a player makes say 60 runs per innings ,gives away 10 through misfields and drops someone who makes 40 then his contribution doesnt look so good and as i said before fielding is a 3rd of the game ....
What a load of bollox. Did you read my post? this man is 5th best EVER run-scorer for England and is in top 20 EVER averages for England . And you want to pick up on misfields and drops !! Do you go to cricket matches with your mum and a stick of Rhubarb ?? Or maybe you go along with your special scoring book with a pencilled-in column for misfields?
Bit if you brought him in with his 47 average at the expense of someone with a 35 average you might think great.
But then two of the batsman, dont feel comfortable playing with him and their average drops by 10 runs and the bowlers who he slated in his book drop their averages down and all of a sudden his 47 average is nowhere near making up what his inclusion has cost the rest of the team.
His performances in the test team were not particularly good the last year or so he played.
Sums up my thoughts well.
People are treating it like he's Lara at his peak, whereas the reality is he might get marginally more runs than anyone he replaces but the hassle he'll bring will be bad for the team, and he'll replace someone younger who the experience will help more too.
The decision is the right one its just been handled badly.
This argument stacks up if the team is decent. At the moment it is crap so he is going to have more of an impact. And if the team is crap - I think it takes any member of that team's right away to be precious.
But his average in 2013, the last time he was in the side, was 32 in Tests and 28 in ODIs. That simply isn't good enough and doesn't even compare to those currently in the side.
Meanwhile, on the road at the Oval, Leics managed 480. And in reply Surrey are 172-1 off 13.4 overs such is the threatening nature of an attack that hasn't won a game in over two years.
You say that AA, but my recollection of 2013 was it was an Ashes year, and that KP was second in averages/aggregate after Bell (who had a phenomenal series, way above everyone else) - and also my recollection is that KP was the top run-scorer in Oz Ashes return, so, with comparisons, it might not seem so bad.?
Bit if you brought him in with his 47 average at the expense of someone with a 35 average you might think great.
But then two of the batsman, dont feel comfortable playing with him and their average drops by 10 runs and the bowlers who he slated in his book drop their averages down and all of a sudden his 47 average is nowhere near making up what his inclusion has cost the rest of the team.
His performances in the test team were not particularly good the last year or so he played.
Sums up my thoughts well.
People are treating it like he's Lara at his peak, whereas the reality is he might get marginally more runs than anyone he replaces but the hassle he'll bring will be bad for the team, and he'll replace someone younger who the experience will help more too.
The decision is the right one its just been handled badly.
This argument stacks up if the team is decent. At the moment it is crap so he is going to have more of an impact. And if the team is crap - I think it takes any member of that team's right away to be precious.
But his average in 2013, the last time he was in the side, was 32 in Tests and 28 in ODIs. That simply isn't good enough and doesn't even compare to those currently in the side.
Meanwhile, on the road at the Oval, Leics managed 480. And in reply Surrey are 172-1 off 13.4 overs such is the threatening nature of an attack that hasn't won a game in over two years.
You say that AA, but my recollection of 2013 was it was an Ashes year, and that KP was second in averages/aggregate after Bell (who had a phenomenal series, way above everyone else) - and also my recollection is that KP was the top run-scorer in Oz Ashes return, so, with comparisons, it might not seem so bad.?
KP scored 324 so an average of 32.4 and Trott, Bairstow, Prior and Carberry have all also departed from that series. The only batsmen to have survived, apart from Bell, are Cook, Root and the recently recalled Stokes.
Comments
It needs somebody like Botham in charge. Get all the dissenters in a room and ask those who would kick up a stink if Pieterson is selected on merit to leave. As they are leaving tell the last of them to close the door. Would go a long way to getting England on the right track.
Drop the guy by all means, but sacking him implied that he was the prime cause of the trouble, and that all would be sweetness and harmony without him. As I've said before, if one of our middle order batsmen gets injured during the Ashes, or loses form, it's daft to rule KP out.
But then two of the batsman, dont feel comfortable playing with him and their average drops by 10 runs and the bowlers who he slated in his book drop their averages down and all of a sudden his 47 average is nowhere near making up what his inclusion has cost the rest of the team.
His performances in the test team were not particularly good the last year or so he played.
People are treating it like he's Lara at his peak, whereas the reality is he might get marginally more runs than anyone he replaces but the hassle he'll bring will be bad for the team, and he'll replace someone younger who the experience will help more too.
The decision is the right one its just been handled badly.
Meanwhile, on the road at the Oval, Leics managed 480. And in reply Surrey are 172-1 off 13.4 overs such is the threatening nature of an attack that hasn't won a game in over two years.
Did you read my post? this man is 5th best EVER run-scorer for England and is in top 20 EVER averages for England .
And you want to pick up on misfields and drops !!
Do you go to cricket matches with your mum and a stick of Rhubarb ?? Or maybe you go along with your special scoring book with a pencilled-in column for misfields?