KP gets his priorities wrong

Not for the first time in his distinguished career, Kevin Pietersen has taken the cricketing press by surprise. His sacking, or should I say resignation, from the England captaincy in January 2009 after just three Tests was the first example. And now he has repeated the dose by retiring from both forms of the international one-day game in seemingly complicated circumstances.

As far as I can gather from the ECB’s press release KP wanted to stop playing the 50-over game, and instead play only Tests, Twenty20 Internationals and, of course, the IPL. But the ECB have decided, in an echo of the way they previously reacted to his request to oust coach Peter Moores during his short stint as captain, that opting out of the middle format of the game only is not permissable. Their reasons for this are actually quite sound. Playing in Twenty20 but not ODIs suggests a player picking and choosing their cricket, and sets a dangerous precedent for others in an era where, in England at least, the 50 over game is fast becoming subservient to the shorter and longer forms of the international game. Although why Pietersen didn’t delay his retirement until after September’s World Twenty20 in Sri Lanka is unclear, particularly as he has reiterated that he “would have readily played for England” in that event. The England management get things right more often than not these days, and I can completely understand why Andy Flower doesn’t want Pietersen waltzing in and out of the dressing room whenever he likes.

For me, Pietersen has got his priorities completely wrong. He says that, at almost 32, it is time to let others gather experience for the 2015 World Cup. But 32 should be a batsman’s peak, and recent form suggests that after a few years of indifferent form, he is now back to his best. He will only be 35 in 2015, and it is very reasonable to believe that he will still be amongst the best one-day batsmen in world cricket. Therefore, I am drawn to the conclusion that other issues have cropped up. Has he ever fully patched up relations with the ECB’s top brass? Has the lure of IPL money become too much? Was he riled by the decision to fine him for his opions on Nick Knight? Whatever the reason I am willing to dismiss the theory that he doesn’t care for the 50 over game. Evidence for this can be found in his joy at finally scoring an ODI hundred in the UAE this winter and his imfamous tweet describing his omission from the squad against Pakistan in 2010 as a “f**k up”.

It should also be pointed out that Pietersen is likely to have plenty of opportunites to become a globetrotting Twenty20 player in four or five years time when his international career has finished. For now his involvement in the IPL, and therefore earning capacity, is unlikely to be increased, and whilst still playing in the Test team, he probably won’t be able to play much in the Big Bash League either. And I’m sure that more cricket for his beloved Surrey, now an option, is not his number one priority in life.

The blow will be hard to take for England. Despite his much publicised ODI century drought between October 2008 and this February, KP was arguably England’s greatest limited-overs cricket of all time. Three hundreds in his first major international series, against South Africa in early 2005, brought Pietersen to the attention of the wider cricketing public. And after another incredible ton against Australia ahead of that summer’s Ashes, Bob Willis said on commentary that his batting had “shades of Vivian Richards”. It took his average 18 ODIs to drop below the 100 mark, and by 2008 he had seven hundreds. One of the most memorable came against New Zealand at Chester-le-Street in that year, when he unveiled his trademark switch-hit for the first time. Ironically his retirement came in the same week that the ICC cricket committee recommended a change to the lbw law to take the shot into account.

But perhaps his most significant contribution to the limited overs game came in the format that he wanted to keep playing. It took Kevin a few years to get to grips with Twenty20, but once he did in 2010 his big hitting propelled England to their first ever international trophy and he was Man of the Tournament. In the two years since his good form in the flashiest type of cricket has continued, with him passing the 1,000 career runs landmark, and reaching the top of the ICC Rankings.

I could be wrong, but I have a strange feeling that we have not seen the last of Kevin Pietersen in England one-day colours. Here’s hoping that he gets his priorities in order, and remembers that he could, and perhaps can still be, one of the very best in the world for years to come.

Sorry, I put this in the wrong section (Could any mod passing by move this please)

Shelsey93 wrote:
And I’m sure that more cricket for his beloved Surrey, now an option, is not his number one priority in life.

Shelsey - hot of the press, well done!

I like and appreciate the tone of your comment above. See also my post on the ''KP retires from international one dayers'' thread questioning whether this would be even possible.

The thing is though, they are very different forms and we have players who play in one and not the other (Cook is a good example) so I find it very odd that the ECB won't let him only play in one of them when he's said he won't play in the other. The stresses etc. of 50 over cricket are completely different from T20 and KP is our best batsman in that form and for me anyway, should be allowed to play in it. Plenty have retired from Tests and continued in ODIs - why is this different?

I don't agree with his decision btw, no way anyone should be prioritising the IPL over international games, the Windies have been big culprits of this recently and now SA have left out a load of players who are tired from IPL duty for their games against Zim and Bangladesh - OK so they are easy games but surely you want to play every game possible for your country? I would.

Sometimes KP does not help himself. Today during the Surrey v Lancs match while fielding at mid on KP was practising his golf swings. Does not exactly convey the impression that 100% commitment to the Surrey cause at a difficult time was uppermost in his mind.

With the greatest of respect, Corporal, I can't imagine I'd be too up for watching the ball disappearing to all parts from supposedly good bowlers, either

To be honest, I don't think that should matter, as long as he is switched on when the ball is delivered (which I presume he was?). He just has that kind of personality, where he needs to be doing something all of the time, I know a few people like it. It doesn't give off the greatest impression, but surely doesn't really matter in the scheme of things.

Fists. I think KP backed your point today in a rather convincing fashion! He certainly seems to have been switched on today, to the tune of 30 fours and 8 sixes....

(slices of humble pie)

Ha, indeed. Funny isn't it how something like a few golf swings in the outfield leave someone wide open to criticism, should they fail to make their mark on a match, yet seems so pointlessly indifferent now after perhaps one of the all time great County Championship innings.

Perception is a funny old thing.

Fists - that sums it up well. As you say, that kind of behaviour seems irrelevant when things are going well but is an obvious focal point for criticism when they aren't (which in Surrey's case is more often than not at the moment)