The Reintegration Thread

[T.J.Hooker]

It's dead simple. He's just better at the actual getting into position and swinging the bat at the ball and making the ball go away bit than the other guys are.

 

[bigred]

I think this whole thing hasn't really proven anything. If you like KP, you'll believe everything he says, if you're not such a big fan, you'll look for issues in it.

All this being our best player is grating on me a bit though. Our recent Test success has been down to the bowlers and KP has been no better than the likes of Trott or Cook in terms of performance. That's not to say that he wasn't a very good player on his day, because he was, but I don't think we're missing much by him not being in the team. On KP though, he's always had a pretty selfish attitude, since day one really. You just need to look at where he was willing to bat for that one. He refused to bat at 3 and even had Collingwood ahead of him in the 2006 Ashes, because he wanted to bat at 5. Kind of ironic that he's worked so hard to preserve his average all these years, that he keeps on begging to come back, which would only ruin it, judging on his form this year.

I doubt he really wants to come back though. He's making plenty of money out of this, plus he gets his face in the papers and on TV and that very much seems to be a priority for him the last few years.

He definitely doesn't want to come back. He's more than happy playing 25 t20 games a year and appearing on The Graham Norton show.

He told Darren Gough on a recent radio interview that if the selectors give him a hint he could come back, he'll start playing 4 day cricket again. The arrogance of the man. Shouldn't it be the other way round?

On a more positive note, I did enjoy reading KPs book. Although I don't believe all of it, it has confirmed what an idiot Stuart Broad is. It also proved that Flower never really liked KP. Probably due to their contrasting philosophies on batting. To give Strauss a whole tour off and not let KP have two days off while they were in the Caribbean, stinks of favouritism to me.

 

[War]

He definitely doesn't want to come back. He's more than happy playing 25 t20 games a year and appearing on The Graham Norton show.

He told Darren Gough on a recent radio interview that if the selectors give him a hint he could come back, he'll start playing 4 day cricket again. The arrogance of the man. Shouldn't it be the other way round?

If you listened to the Gough interview, you may have also heard him say he had issues with his knee. He was told by doctors before the Ashes in England, that he required surgery & it could rule him out of all 10 Ashes tests.

So he put ENG 1st and decided to take injections & play through the pain. Plus he noted this year his knee needed a rest & he fresh again currently.

Based on how the ECB has behaved this year, its wishful thinking to believe if he played 4-day cricket & scored runs they would have picked him. All evidence points to them continuing to be against him being picked.

Therefore in KPs situation, the selection, Giles Clark (key man here) would have to state unequivocally that KP can be recalled for ENG, because it would indeed be a waste of time for him to play 4-day cricket.

 

[War]

Nothing to do with the bit where he managed to get the captain so pissed off that he lobbed his kit bag off the changing room balcony...



And nothing to do with the fact that they refused to select him for both a one day final and T20 finals day. He was practically dropped from his county side.

I think it's fairly clear he's not a team player, he'd be excellent if cricket was a solo sport...

Heard the balcony throwing rumors, but generally this his inaccurate. He had issues with Notts pertaining to them sacking his mentor/coach who brought him to England - Clive Rice.

As KP said, Hampshire dropping him for T20 finals day was a fair decision because he was hardly their & as a ENG international living 3 hrs away from the Rosebowl, he never got time to e around the ground, he just got to drop in at games. At Surrey he can do that. Plus nobody from Hampshire in the past never actually criticizing him - only former Notts, Flower era ENG. Hampshire, IPL, Surrey, Fletcher/Vaughan ENG, CPL, SA domestic teams never had issue with him.

 

[War]

On KP though, he's always had a pretty selfish attitude, since day one really. You just need to look at where he was willing to bat for that one. He refused to bat at 3 and even had Collingwood ahead of him in the 2006 Ashes, because he wanted to bat at 5. Kind of ironic that he's worked so hard to preserve his average all these years, that he keeps on begging to come back, which would only ruin it, judging on his form this year.

Haha sorry but you can't be serious here?

Why should KP have batted at 3? # 3 is very specialist position & many teams great players did not bat their well & were better off at #4 or 5 - or depending on team strength or qualities of other team mates. Based on your strange logic Viv Richards, Sobers, Tendulkar, Chanderpaul, Lara, S Waugh, Clarke etc were selfish for refusing to batting at # 3, despite being their teams best batsman.

KP never suited batting @ # 3 in tests. When he initially came into the team, # 5 suited him well - so their was absolutely no reason for him to change that position during the 2006 Ashes. I don't recall that ever being debated at the time, thus that's an inaccurate revisionist point.

 

[War]

No S.F. Barnes?

If this team was playing another all-time XI lets say in traditions overcast, green-top wicket ENG conditions, then i'd pick Barnes to support Trueman/Larwood/Botham in a all pace attack.

But in normal conditions where a spinner is needed is need, i'd prefer to have the 90mph plus pace & skill of Trueman/Larwood to lead the attack.

 

[MUFC1987]

He definitely doesn't want to come back. He's more than happy playing 25 t20 games a year and appearing on The Graham Norton show.

He told Darren Gough on a recent radio interview that if the selectors give him a hint he could come back, he'll start playing 4 day cricket again. The arrogance of the man. Shouldn't it be the other way round?

This is the thing for me. If he'd made an effort to play 4 day cricket this season (outside of his T20 stuff) and scored masses of runs, we'd be looking at a completely different scenario now. He could have had plenty of runs to back him up and the calls for him to be recalled would have been massive. Instead, we're looking at a guy who's barely scored a run for the last 6 months. I mean sure, when he's on and playing well, he's great to watch. But the new generation is coming in that department with Buttler and I don't think we miss his runs in the Test side because the younger guys have come in and done well.

Plus, he would have more than proven his point to the selectors if he'd scored mountains of runs this summer. It's strange.

 

[_Sam_]

Gotta admit, I think the pinnacle moment of watching him in one of his rare games at Hampshre was watching him struggle to put faces to team mates names after a game in a bbc radio solent interview when questioned over the quality of the youth .

Was also the time he jetted off to Barbados on holiday rather than play for us while I believe the opposing team was Warks with both Bell and Trott playing (or another team with 2 ints at least).

 

[bigred]

Haha sorry but you can't be serious here?

Why should KP have batted at 3? # 3 is very specialist position & many teams great players did not bat their well & were better off at #4 or 5 - or depending on team strength or qualities of other team mates. Based on your strange logic Viv Richards, Sobers, Tendulkar, Chanderpaul, Lara, S Waugh, Clarke etc were selfish for refusing to batting at # 3, despite being their teams best batsman.

KP never suited batting @ # 3 in tests. When he initially came into the team, # 5 suited him well - so their was absolutely no reason for him to change that position during the 2006 Ashes. I don't recall that ever being debated at the time, thus that's an inaccurate revisionist point.

How an earth do you or anyone else know whether KP would have suited batting at 3? He was too selfish to try it. Pretty sure Gary Ballance didn't say it wasn't his position when he was asked to do something he'd never done for his county.

 

[War]

How an earth do you or anyone else know whether KP would have suited batting at 3? He was too selfish to try it. Pretty sure Gary Ballance didn't say it wasn't his position when he was asked to do something he'd never done for his county.

Huh? Again this point doesn't make any cricket sense. I can't read KP mind, but without reading yours and other poster which is suggesting selfishness in KP's part in this read, you guys sound like KP detractors who are making a point that has no merit.

There was no point in KP's ENG career where talk of him batting @ # 3 long term ever came up. When he first came into the team, he slotted in @ 5 because Vaughan had the # 3 spot & Bell was better suited @ 4, when he came him for Thorpe.

Then later when Vaughan's knee made it difficult for him to play regularly & Cook came into the side with a bang, Cook initially batted @ 3 because the Trescothick was still around. By time the 2006 series in IND, KP was batting @ 4 regularly.

Regarding the point made about the 2006 Ashes, well you may recall ENG losing Trescothick at the start of the tour & Vaughan did not recover in time. So with those 2 experienced player out, KP was the obvious key player for ENG, so it made perfect sense for that series to keep him @ 5. After that he was back @ 4 for the rest of his career, which suited ENG well as Trott emerged in the latter years as the perfect # 3.

There was a slight period between Vaughan last series vs SA 2008 & Trott's emergence in Ashes 09, when we had a big # 3 issue. Guys like Bopara, Shah failed in the position & Bell struggled to cement a spot. At this point even then nobody was calling for KP to move up to # 3, because cricket logic generally dictates when your team is weak, your best batsman isn't exposed early i.e modern Windies with Chanderpaul & recent struggling AUS with Clarke.

In the other formats when ENG wanted him top open batting or bat # 3 in T20s in ODIs, he scored hundreds in ODIs & won us our only world title from # 3. So the selfish argument falls flat on its face sir.


Ballance situation is incomparable. ENG were in a post Ashes mess up until the Lord's test & were unsure about a lot things in the batting order. Ballance played well in a new position & long may it continue, But given how poor IND were - how well & secure ENG new batting group is, still has some questions leading up to the Ashes.

Lets say next season KP is playing 4-day cricket & is making heads of runs & these guys are struggling vs AUS again - then all this talk of this "new generation" moving on from KP, will be quickly squashed.

 

[grkrama]

How an earth do you or anyone else know whether KP would have suited batting at 3? He was too selfish to try it. Pretty sure Gary Ballance didn't say it wasn't his position when he was asked to do something he'd never done for his county.

simply put you need a consolidator at no3 not an counter attacker, anyone with half ounce of cricketing brain wouldn't have asked him to, clarke too hasn't budged much from his position of No5 for a long time when things were falling around him

Player's all around the world are finicky with positions, rahanae wanted middle order slot than opening at start and even went without getting selected, SRT didn't like his batting position being messed around with and had issues with dravid i think over it etc its not selfish but they know what is best for them and team.

 

[stefan]

The likes of ABDV has also said he doesn't want to bat 3 and prefers 5. Guess he is also a selfish player.

Also find this new generation proving themselves a bit funny, they only "found" themselves against a poor India team. They were nowhere against Sri Lanka. Lets see how they go when they face some real attacks instead of what India dished up.

KP was sacked for non cricketing reasons, 4 cricket would have made no difference. If he was sacked for cricketing reasons all the batsmen should have been sacked after the ashes as none of them made more runs then KP.

 

[blockerdave]

another good article by barmy on the front page today. very good point about the cricket press - they remind me of the political lobby journalists, being fed "lines to take" by an Alastair Campbell figure and pushing that slavishly. Just as they had to wake up to the reality of blogs like Guido Fawkes and others across the spectrum, pulling the stories apart and applying a measure of critical thinking to the story, so people like the ludicrous Paul Newman and preposterous Stephen Brenkley need to understand we're not going to meekly accept any old bollocks Gile Clarke has slipped them over a port at lunch and they've repeated verbatim. it doesn't work that way any more.

 

[_Sam_]

I do quite like how this is a subject that has split peoples opinions so equally in the country.

 

[grkrama]

Self-raising Flower | England Cricket Blog - The Full Toss


"Flowerism diminished the England captaincy, infantilised the players, corroded diversity, and outlawed freedom of thought. He constructed a power base of such dimensions he became inviolate from scrutiny or assessment from above."