Chesney Christ
New member
Oh right, my brother just explained to me that saying "This" is a way of agreeing with someone on the internet. I now feel like an old man for not knowing this. You kids!
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Kevin Pietersen: good or no good?
- Thread starter countrygull
- Start date
Oh right, my brother just explained to me that saying "This" is a way of agreeing with someone on the internet. I now feel like an old man for not knowing this. You kids!
Gerbil
Nsc's most loved
He is just out of form. He's without doubt the most talented England player, in a class of his own.
Kalimantan Gull
Well-known member
Pietersen's averages
2005 44.93
2006 53.72
2007 50.35
2008 50.75
2009 47.50
Remarkably consistent, although 2009 wasn't the best year for him, just the one 100. He lost the captaincy and struggled with injury. A 50 average used to be the sign of the best, now the very best average 55.
Whats interesting is that, as well as never struggling for form over an extended period, he has never had a purple patch where everything goes right. Sometimes it works for him and sometimes he gets out cheaply, so I wouldn't worry too much.
KZNSeagull
Well-known member
Some interesting points raised here.
My 2 sons are English. I am English, my wife is English. We just so happen to live in South Africa. At what point do we stop being English and become South African? Why does being raised in a different country make it less valid that you should play for England? If my children become exceptionally good at cricket, I would want them to play for England (if they wanted to) -should that not be allowed?
England have always had "foreigners" in their side. Tony Grieg, Basil D'Olivera, Robin Smith, Allan Lamb to name but a few. Keppler Wessels played for Australia. If England had to rely upon the English cricketing system and only picked home grown players, I suspect they would not be very good!!
As for KP, he was not picked up by SA because at the time he was a poor bowler and could not bat. Would they even pick him now? I doubt it (too inconsistent). To me, he seems to be trying too hard. He wants to get one over on the Saffers but is beginning to look increasingly desparate. He needs to play a sensible innings in Joburg and should look at the way Bell has played as an example. Once he has got runs on the board, then he can play his more aggressive game and (metaphorically) ram the ball down Smith's throat!!
My 2 sons are English. I am English, my wife is English. We just so happen to live in South Africa. At what point do we stop being English and become South African? Why does being raised in a different country make it less valid that you should play for England? If my children become exceptionally good at cricket, I would want them to play for England (if they wanted to) -should that not be allowed?
England have always had "foreigners" in their side. Tony Grieg, Basil D'Olivera, Robin Smith, Allan Lamb to name but a few. Keppler Wessels played for Australia. If England had to rely upon the English cricketing system and only picked home grown players, I suspect they would not be very good!!
As for KP, he was not picked up by SA because at the time he was a poor bowler and could not bat. Would they even pick him now? I doubt it (too inconsistent). To me, he seems to be trying too hard. He wants to get one over on the Saffers but is beginning to look increasingly desparate. He needs to play a sensible innings in Joburg and should look at the way Bell has played as an example. Once he has got runs on the board, then he can play his more aggressive game and (metaphorically) ram the ball down Smith's throat!!
No, I still view Symonds as a traitor and feel he shouldn't have done it. whereas I think it's BRILLIANT that people like Pietersen chose to play for England. Double standards perhaps; but as Lord Palmerston said when asked what nationality he'd like to be if he wasn't English: "If I were not an Englishman then I would wish to be an Englishman." I guess I just can't believe that Symonds ignored this extremely sound advice. (I suppose it's a bit like people wanting to play for Brighton).
Also we (England) being the beacon of light and hope that other countries aspire to emulate have a long and proud history of welcoming 'foreigners' into the cricket teams. Remember our two born-and-bred West Indians in the 1980s? (DeFreitas and Small).
Anyway, back to Pietersen's place in the team being judged on cricket ability rather than racial origin. Just a question for the people (rightly) pointing out that he's probably our best batsmen who's just suffered a few low scores recently: if you HAD to drop a batsman for the next Test in order to accomodate an extra bowler - who would you drop?
Hatterlovesbrighton
something clever
Disagree on that UB. In 2007 and 2008 he was a key partnership breaker getting us back into games that were getting away from us, and got some quick runs as well.
On the test scene though I can only see that he is the backup all rounder and with Broad younger than him, he will only get a shout when and if he gets injured. I can see though that Broad will be rested for Bangladesh so may get a chance there.
sten_super
Brain Surgeon
I can't understand a situation where that'd be the case. The first and third Tests were both played on pretty flat wickets and we went with 4 bowlers. They reckon there'll be plenty happening for the seamers in the fifth, so that backs up the 4 bowlers strategy, it doesn't demand that we play another!
Also, if we want to play 5 bowlers then we should play five bowlers (rather than 4 + Wright, who is neither a Test bowler nor batsman), which means either Plunkett or the other spinner (whose name I've forgotten). I suppose you could play Prior 6, Broad 7, Swann 8, Plunkett 9 which would give you 3 bowlers who can bat a bit. However it'd be foolish.
Having said that; probably Trott, with Bell moving to 3. But that's a vote under protest.
Hatterlovesbrighton
something clever
But that isn't KP. We have 3 good grinders in form in Cook, Bell and Colly. We need expansive batsmen that are agressive from the start and KP provides that in spades. He's out of form at the moment but sure he will come good.
Agree that I wouldn't want to drop a batsman for the last test but if someone had a gun to my head I would probably choose Colly because he can't bowl or field how he normally does.
KZNSeagull
Well-known member
Good question. If you wanted batsmen that you could rely on to stick around as long as possible, then KP would get the chop. If you wanted batsmen to score quick runs, then probably Trott or Cook. Luckily, however, England dont need to bowl SA out twice to win the series, so we dont need to drop a batsman!!
Before the series started I thought that England would struggle in the bowling department, but they have been the team more likely to take wickets. The attack appears more disciplined than SA's and England need to be careful not to upset things by trying to introduce a 5th bowler for the Ashes. Collingwood and Trott can bowl so maybe look to use them more to tie up an end and create pressure and leave the wicket taking to the main 4.
KZNSeagull
Well-known member
What if England need to bat for 2 days to win the series? Do you really want KP to come in at 25-2 and charge down the wicket trying to smash Steyn back over his head? There is a place for aggression and Strauss, Collingwood and Bell are all capable of it when the need arises. What KP is lacking at the moment is the ability to stick around when he has to. He has managed it in the past. What England need to win the series is to bat for 3 and a half days and KP should be aware of that
keaton
Big heart, hot blood and balls. Big balls
- Nov 18, 2004
- 9,972
His method of batting out a day seemed to work in the fifth test in the Ashes in 2005?
KZNSeagull
Well-known member
4 and a half years ago when the opposition did not know his style of play. He has been found out now.
I did say that he has done it in the past. The frustrating thing about him at the moment is that he does not appear to adapt his style of play to suit the situation. I cannot see him doing a Colly or Bell and leaving pretty much everything that is not hitting the stumps. If he wants to be seen as a great test player, he has to do this, in my opinion.
If he was the last recognised batsman left with 5 overs of the game to play and save the match and he played either shot that got him out in this test, would you not want to shoot him?
happypig
Staring at the rude boys
Drop Pietersen at your peril, he's due a big one and the final test could be it. If we dropped players because they had temporarily lost form, then we'd have dropped Strauss, cook, Bell, Colly, KP, Prior and have Wright/Trott opening.
The French Mistress
New member
- Jun 24, 2007
- 1,279
Just a thought.............give Carberry a go, they flew him out as cover for Collingwood I seem to remember. Drop KP in my opinion.
sten_super
Brain Surgeon
Brilliant, just brilliant.
South Africa have called up Pakistani (and recently SA-qualified) spinner Imran Tahir into the squad for the final Test. I would love it, absolutely LOVE IT, if he plays after all the stick they've been dishing out about '13 Saffers on the field' etc.
South Africa have called up Pakistani (and recently SA-qualified) spinner Imran Tahir into the squad for the final Test. I would love it, absolutely LOVE IT, if he plays after all the stick they've been dishing out about '13 Saffers on the field' etc.
cheeseroll
New member
i like Carberry but surely not for KP. i'm sure KP is more disappointed than anyone about his form.
Keep the same team, KP is due a massive innings..