barmyarmy submitted a new blog post
The mysterious case of the possibly-tampered-with non-dossier
KP: “I’ve read there is a ‘dossier’, a four-page document that lists my crimes in Australia ... The problem is, it doesn’t actually exist"
When in the week that Kevin Pietersen was doing media interviews to promote his book, and extracts were being published in the Daily Telegraph, the “dossier” finally appeared no-one was very surprised. As Pietersen made clear in his book, the standard ECB tactic used against him over the years was to leak confidential information to privileged journalists. The Daily Mail had been posting hints as to what we might find in there all week.
On Cricinfo, UK Editor David Hopps wrote the following:
“ESPNcricinfo is in possession of a legal document that provides a clear insight into the ECB state of mind as it contends with the fallout from the end of Kevin Pietersen's England career.”
After a correction from the ECB the article was amended to say that,
“The ECB confirmed the document was part of the Pietersen analysis, but stated: "It is simply part of a privileged legal document, produced by the ECB's lawyers compiling information as part of the ECB's internal due diligence ahead of the release of the Kevin Pietersen book."
The date on the dossier is 22nd September 2014 which supports the assertion that it was only drawn up recently in preparation for the expiration of the confidentiality clause and the book release. No-one is denying that dossier was leaked but there now seems to be some controversy over who leaked it.
On 9 October David Hopps posted the following on twitter, then promptly deleted it:
“@DavidKHopps: Will the media please wake up to the fact that ECB did not leak the KP document”
When I questioned this and queried who else could have leaked it I was told that:
“@DavidKHopps: There are millions of possibilities. You are leaping to conclusions with no evidence. That's all I am saying.”
This seemed a surprisingly strong response from the person who had written the story. There was also the question of why if this point was so important he had promptly deleted his own tweet.
As Geoffrey Boycott has observed in an article today, there is an information vacuum here. I personally can’t see who could have leaked the document other than the ECB or the lawyers involved and I respect Cricinfo’s right to protect their source but this does feel like another rather extraordinary episode in the KP saga.
Does it matter if it wasn’t the ECB who leaked the story? Well, the main criticism was of the pettiness and ridiculousness of what they have admitted to be a genuine document so not really. It reflects slightly better on them in PR terms but the fact that both the Daily Mail and Cricinfo had this information suggests that if the ECB didn’t leak it they ought to be finding out who did. We are of course regularly assured that the ECB doesn’t leak. Nor does the government.
I just find it curious the over-reaction from David Hopps and the accusation of “wild theories” and “bad journalism”. He has done an excellent job on the story so far and I am still confused as to why the original tweet was deleted.
Full transcript of tweets
@saltiresfan: Here is that deleted tweet: “@DavidKHopps: Will the media please wake up to the fact that ECB did not leak the KP document"
@twoglassknees: @saltiresfan @DavidKHopps How on earth did it come into circulation, then?!
@saltiresfan: @twoglassknees @DavidKHopps Well it could have been leaked from the lawyers. Certainly did the ECB case far more harm than good.
@DavidKHopps: @saltiresfan @twoglassknees You are all engaging in wild theories based on no evidence. That is Twitter. Journalists should know better.
@saltiresfan: @DavidKHopps @twoglassknees Is it a wild theory? Cricinfo got hold of the document. Logically it either came from the ECB or the lawyers.
@DavidKHopps: @saltiresfan @twoglassknees There are millions of possibilities. You are leaping to conclusions with no evidence. That's all I am saying.
@saltiresfan: @DavidKHopps @twoglassknees Speculating on the most likely explanations is not the same as leaping to conclusions.
@DavidKHopps: @saltiresfan @twoglassknees It might do for the untamed wildlands of Twitter. But its bad journalism. And it was bad journalism I criticised
@saltiresfan: @DavidKHopps @twoglassknees Then by extension you are accusing almost every newspaper and press corps member of "bad journalism".
@DavidKHopps: @saltiresfan @twoglassknees <Sigh of despair> Bye
Continue reading the Original Blog Post.
The mysterious case of the possibly-tampered-with non-dossier
KP: “I’ve read there is a ‘dossier’, a four-page document that lists my crimes in Australia ... The problem is, it doesn’t actually exist"
When in the week that Kevin Pietersen was doing media interviews to promote his book, and extracts were being published in the Daily Telegraph, the “dossier” finally appeared no-one was very surprised. As Pietersen made clear in his book, the standard ECB tactic used against him over the years was to leak confidential information to privileged journalists. The Daily Mail had been posting hints as to what we might find in there all week.
On Cricinfo, UK Editor David Hopps wrote the following:
“ESPNcricinfo is in possession of a legal document that provides a clear insight into the ECB state of mind as it contends with the fallout from the end of Kevin Pietersen's England career.”
After a correction from the ECB the article was amended to say that,
“The ECB confirmed the document was part of the Pietersen analysis, but stated: "It is simply part of a privileged legal document, produced by the ECB's lawyers compiling information as part of the ECB's internal due diligence ahead of the release of the Kevin Pietersen book."
The date on the dossier is 22nd September 2014 which supports the assertion that it was only drawn up recently in preparation for the expiration of the confidentiality clause and the book release. No-one is denying that dossier was leaked but there now seems to be some controversy over who leaked it.
On 9 October David Hopps posted the following on twitter, then promptly deleted it:
“@DavidKHopps: Will the media please wake up to the fact that ECB did not leak the KP document”
When I questioned this and queried who else could have leaked it I was told that:
“@DavidKHopps: There are millions of possibilities. You are leaping to conclusions with no evidence. That's all I am saying.”
This seemed a surprisingly strong response from the person who had written the story. There was also the question of why if this point was so important he had promptly deleted his own tweet.
As Geoffrey Boycott has observed in an article today, there is an information vacuum here. I personally can’t see who could have leaked the document other than the ECB or the lawyers involved and I respect Cricinfo’s right to protect their source but this does feel like another rather extraordinary episode in the KP saga.
Does it matter if it wasn’t the ECB who leaked the story? Well, the main criticism was of the pettiness and ridiculousness of what they have admitted to be a genuine document so not really. It reflects slightly better on them in PR terms but the fact that both the Daily Mail and Cricinfo had this information suggests that if the ECB didn’t leak it they ought to be finding out who did. We are of course regularly assured that the ECB doesn’t leak. Nor does the government.
I just find it curious the over-reaction from David Hopps and the accusation of “wild theories” and “bad journalism”. He has done an excellent job on the story so far and I am still confused as to why the original tweet was deleted.
Full transcript of tweets
@saltiresfan: Here is that deleted tweet: “@DavidKHopps: Will the media please wake up to the fact that ECB did not leak the KP document"
@twoglassknees: @saltiresfan @DavidKHopps How on earth did it come into circulation, then?!
@saltiresfan: @twoglassknees @DavidKHopps Well it could have been leaked from the lawyers. Certainly did the ECB case far more harm than good.
@DavidKHopps: @saltiresfan @twoglassknees You are all engaging in wild theories based on no evidence. That is Twitter. Journalists should know better.
@saltiresfan: @DavidKHopps @twoglassknees Is it a wild theory? Cricinfo got hold of the document. Logically it either came from the ECB or the lawyers.
@DavidKHopps: @saltiresfan @twoglassknees There are millions of possibilities. You are leaping to conclusions with no evidence. That's all I am saying.
@saltiresfan: @DavidKHopps @twoglassknees Speculating on the most likely explanations is not the same as leaping to conclusions.
@DavidKHopps: @saltiresfan @twoglassknees It might do for the untamed wildlands of Twitter. But its bad journalism. And it was bad journalism I criticised
@saltiresfan: @DavidKHopps @twoglassknees Then by extension you are accusing almost every newspaper and press corps member of "bad journalism".
@DavidKHopps: @saltiresfan @twoglassknees <Sigh of despair> Bye
Continue reading the Original Blog Post.
Last edited by a moderator:
