• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

The Cricket Thread

Trott out for a duck in the 1st over playing a horrific shot, his time is up now, get young Lythe in for the Kiwi's then the Ashes

Only Bradman had a better record after 10 tests than Ballance, some start to his career
 
Absolutely ridiculous

Kevin Pietersen has been told he will not be recalled by England despite scoring a career-best 326 not out for Surrey.

The 34-year-old, sacked by England in February 2014, hit his maiden triple century against Leicestershire.

Pietersen met Andrew Strauss, England's new director of cricket, on Monday and was told he would not play for his country again.

He said earlier he was "desperate" to return to the international game.

BBC cricket correspondent Jonathan Agnew broke the story on Monday evening and said that "form and ability" were not the issue and that the England set-up felt selecting Pietersen would be "a backward step".

He added: "While no cricketer is actually barred from playing for England, it seems that Pietersen was told that his situation hadn't changed and his selection for England remains the longest of long shots.

"Coming on the day that he followed Colin Graves' words to the letter and scored 326 not out, one can only imagine Pietersen's disappointment - and that of his supporters.

"Whatever Strauss reveals on Tuesday, there can be no further ambiguity."
 
Good riddance to bad rubbish. Nobody doubts his ability (although he's not in the same league as the true batting greats of today) but the guy is a cnut, who disrespects his team mates and bad mouthed them all to sell a few books. Cricket is a team game, and bringing back someone like him sends out the wrong message and suggests that it's acceptable to think of yourself as being bigger than the team. There is nothing wrong with England's middle order and I for one think Strauss has made the right call. He can't expect to do the things he's done, and say the things he's said, and just expect everyone to welcome him back with open arms.
 
I agree, but then they shouldn't have sent mixed signals with Graves telling him to score runs in county cricket & then he would be considered. The ECB have cost him a lot of money by suggesting he had a way back into the side when evidently that was untrue.
 
Good riddance to bad rubbish. Nobody doubts his ability (although he's not in the same league as the true batting greats of today) but the guy is a cnut, who disrespects his team mates and bad mouthed them all to sell a few books. Cricket is a team game, and bringing back someone like him sends out the wrong message and suggests that it's acceptable to think of yourself as being bigger than the team. There is nothing wrong with England's middle order and I for one think Strauss has made the right call. He can't expect to do the things he's done, and say the things he's said, and just expect everyone to welcome him back with open arms.

My thoughts as well and its good to see that at least some sport still has principles over gain.
 
I agree with the last few posts. You simply can't do what KP has done and play for the team again, the idiot graves has a lot to answer for, stupid dangling a carrot like that in front of KP.

Like others have said, we have balance, bell and root for the position KP would have to play, that's about the only part of the England team that's strong, I don't see KP improving on that so much that it's worth the hassle of him returning. Let's not forget, his form in the last 18 months hasn't exactly been great, the 300 he's scored was against a side that's not won a game for 2 years!

The whole affair from start to finish is a complete shambles, I dont know how someone can alienate themselves from the rest of the team and management soo much and how it was allowed to get to that stage!
 
The ECB should not have said for him to play country cricket and get runs and that he would have a clean slate. That is the problem here.

Exactly. I don't like Petersen and don't really have an issue with them banning him from the team, but why say he would be eligible and then turn around and say he isn't? They must have known for weeks that Strauss was lined up for the role and that he wouldn't allow KP to play, unless they made the appointment spur of the moment, knowing the ECB, I don't know what to believe.
 
The ECB should not have said for him to play country cricket and get runs and that he would have a clean slate. That is the problem here.

They didn't say that, they said go back and score loads of runs and you MIGHT be considered again. MIGHT be considered. If he took that as a guarantee that he would get back in if he scored runs then he's an even bigger fool than I thought he was. However I do concede that Graves shouldn't have said what he said if he was not the one who was going to be making the decision in any event.
 
They didn't say that, they said go back and score loads of runs and you MIGHT be considered again. MIGHT be considered. If he took that as a guarantee that he would get back in if he scored runs then he's an even bigger fool than I thought he was. However I do concede that Graves shouldn't have said what he said if he was not the one who was going to be making the decision in any event.

Don't get me wrong, I don't want KP any where near the team, he is a disruptive figure. But Graves told him he had a "clean slate" and to go and score runs in the counties. That gives him every reason to be agrieved after scoring a 300 against a (poor) Leics team.

The ECB incoming roostered up and this is the issue. It makes them look like cowboys and gives KP fuel to spout off and his gang of media superstars to back him. The team do not need this with a huge ashes tour coming up.

It has been handled very poorly.

And I actually think Strauss did well with his unequivocal answer.
 
Back