I don’t know about you, but I’m still reeling from the events of the last twenty four hours. We witnessed a Paul Downton media appearance surreally juxtaposed with an England performance so dire it demonstrated the exact opposite of everything he said.
This was the stuff of Comical Ali. This was the owner of the White Star Line still boasting about the Titanic’s unsinkability at the very moment survivors were scrambling aboard the Carpathia. This was a man arguing that black is white – or at least, that black is due to become white, and no one can guarantee that it won’t happen.
James ran the rule over the wretched business earlier. Dmitri Old has this. I can also recommend Peter Miller and Dave Tickner on the Cricket Geek podcast.
But we now have a twist on our hands. Barely a day since Downton said he would be “very surprised” if “natural leader” Alastair Cook wasn’t retained as captain by the selectors – they’re gearing up for the biggest u-turn in cricket history.
As Nick Hoult reports in the Telegraph tonight.
Alastair Cook arrived back in England on Wednesday with his dream of captaining England at the World Cup looking increasingly in jeopardy.
Support for Cook as England’s one‑day captain has been steadfast at the top of English cricket during his troubled year, but he is likely to find that has shifted this week when the selectors sit down to debate his position on Friday.
The England and Wales Cricket Board will announce the World Cup squad at 11am on Saturday with the question over the captain’s future set to dominate the selection meeting.
How would Hoult have got hold of this unless there was something in it? My guess is that Downton or an apparatchik has leaked something to prepare the ground. The clue is here:
The selectors have to weigh up whether or not picking him for the World Cup will overburden him as he faces up to the biggest batting crisis of his career in a year when England will be tested by the world’s best attacks.
This is the line they will take. It’s their exit strategy. And if so, what a bloody cheek – to drop Cook not because it will make the team stronger, but to protect Cook the individual. Cook is more important than England.
Give me a moment to get my head around this.
Yesterday we were hearing that:
Why do we think he’s the best person for the job in Australia? In reality, in September the selectors got together and spent nearly a week kicking the tyres and working out were we best to stick with Alastair, given that we were to going to be playing a World Cup in Australia and in New Zealand, with two new balls, where his track record is good, where he has been captain for 3½ years.
And now, they’ve changed their minds? Congratulations to everybody involved.
True, it’s as yet only a rumour. Let’s wait and see what Saturday brings. Intriguing though, isn’t it?
Speaking of our Dear Leader, two things stuck out from his post-match interviews yesterday.
I’m working hard on my game…I’ll work incredibly hard.
Is that really the solution to his problems? He always works hard. He’s worked hard throughout this long slump of his. It’s made no difference at all. So why hope it will help now? Perhaps the hard work is actually making things worse.
I’m captain of my country, yes, it hasn’t gone well over the last 12 months with my batting in the one-day game, but it would feel very wrong to walk away.
Would it. Really?
As the Geeks say in the podcast, there’s nothing honourable about plodding on just to avoid losing face – and in the process, hurting other players’ careers.
Meanwhile, here are a few final thoughts on the Downton Opus. Yes, I know we’ve already gone over this in some depth, but bear with me. He will never again take questions on these subjects. This was officially the Last Chance.
Here’s the rub. We now know that Downton and the ECB will never explain why they fired Kevin Pietersen. We will never have resolution. And this deserves some emphasis and reflection.
We have ended up right back where we started. At the heart of this entire affair was’t the deselection of one cricketer, but the permanent firing of a player – crucially, without any explanation. The ECB simply told us to shut up and keep buying the tickets. This was the specific cause of the anger.
As I wrote at the time (and I stand by it now):
We, the followers of the England cricket team, have been treated with an arrogance and contempt to a degree which is grotesque even by the standards of the English game’s hierarchy.
The ECB has taken a long, slow look at us, and then – quite deliberately – thrown a bucket of cold piss in our face.
Ten months of fury later, and still the ECB don’t give a monkey’s. They haven’t listened, they haven’t learned, they just hate our guts. The sheer selfish arrogance of Paul Downton’s stance is now more breathtaking than ever. He stands there, oleaginously, telling us to move on – and expecting us to think “oh well, fair enough”.
“I’m not sure I could have [explained] it any better”, he told Simon Mann on TMS, with unimpeachable pomposity. In want of an excuse, Downton hid behind the tendentious windshield of employment law, which was absurd. Pietersen himself wants ECB disclosure.
When Mann (who did a decent job) asked Downton why the ECB wanted a confidentiality agreement, the response spoke for itself.
I’m not going to go down this route, this happened eleven months ago, okay? If… what I said before was – was that was it for the benefit of the English cricket? Absolutely it was. And so we’re not going to get caught up in detail about something that is past history and frankly not that relevant to where England is going.
And that was that. Basically, he just stuck two fingers up at us. Again.To repeat – we still have no resolution. And we never will. Not until they’re all gone. Clarke, Downton, and Cook.
Further along in the interview, there were some real pearlers. On Pietersen’s book:
It was actually just very sad to read because it tarnished, in their mind, the other players’ minds, a very successful period for England. So it’s sad. I’m sure readers would’ve liked to hear more about cricket.
Which sounds very suspiciously similar to what the ECB-contracted players said on the subject. Almost to the word. It also misses the point. Pietersen’s principal invective was aimed at periods when things unravelled – not the good times.
On bullying:
There were no issues as far as I’m concerned and gone through the records, any formal accusations of bullying. That’s not the recollection of the majority of other players who’ve said anything.
Not the majority? What about the others?
On Pietersen’s criticisms of Downton himself.
I’m not responding. It’s irrelevant, it’s happened…I’m sure your listeners are much more interested in what’s happening with young players coming through and how well we’re going to do in the World Cup.
Then he donned the rose-tinted glasses.
Peter and Paul Farbrace have done an excellent job, you know, under enormous pressure because the spotlight has been on them to create what has become a winning environment in test match cricket.
At a pinch. 2014 test record: drawn 2, lost 2, won 3.
Ever the showman, Downton finished with a flourish.
SM: When you move around with this job, around the UK, do you get the sense that the public is behind you or do you sense a hostility over the decisions that you’ve taken this year?
PD: I find absolutely people are so upbeat about these young guys coming through and I think it’s a great shame that that hasn’t come across in terms of, as you say, two stories have dominated. Because actually it’s been sensational if you look at it. We’ve had a test series where we’ve had six players almost making their debut. All of those players contributed in the summer and it’s been fantastic to watch. I’d much more get that coming back to me than anything else.
SM: You don’t find any hostility around the country?
PD: No. Absolutely.
You can easily imagine this, can’t you? Every time Downton shows his face in public, supporters rush over to high-five him, unable to contain their excitement and praise for his development of young players. And with not a single other thought on their minds.
Tomorrow we’ll look at the increasingly murky role Downton plays in team selection, and the choice of venues to host tests and ODIs from 2017-19.
For now I’ll leave you with a post from John, on our comments board, which I thought deserved a reprise.
My mistake was in attempting to describe in such simple terms the varied and complex network of verbal mechanisms that high level ECB operatives are currently using to levitate themselves away from the constraints of base reality in interviews.
Downton moves things to the next level with an ambitious attempt to warp the fabric of reality itself by retconning Cook managing to miraculously escape the sack over the summer despite consistently shitty performances into some sort of unspecific feat of dressing room mastery.
No doubt Sam Robson, Nick Compton and Michael Carberry are enormously inspired by seeing Cook somehow manage to stay on the teamsheet for every game despite performances that would have seen any of them discarded long before.
One question: why the hell did Downton give his interviews before the squad was finalised? He could have saved himself a lot of grief (if this U-turn materialises te:Cook) by simply explaining the decision after it had been made.
Is there no end to the ECB’s incompetence? Why not wait until the series has finished either, instead of talking with one game to go? The mind absolutely boggles. Do they actually plan ahead or think things through at all?
I thought that too.
There was something so unbelievably delicious though about Downton gushing about how the way our batsmen have played spin this tour has been “revelationary” [sic], right before our batsmen did their level best to play each Sri Lankan spinner as though they were bowling with frag grenades.
They probably do not think through much at all when it comes to the cricketing public. We seem to be of minimal concern. Not worthy of more than being addressed as a bunch of idiots who can be palmed off with any old rubbish.
One more point. If Cook is to go does it matter how it is phrased? Why not allow him to maintain a shred of dignity. He might be misguided on the captaincy but by all accounts, including that of Butch on Switch Hit this evening, he is a decent man.
I don’t think that he’s a decent man at all. For example, who went blabbing for Flower about what was said in a players-only team meeting?
That’s true. I was surprised by that.
In a word “NO!” They remain incompetent because they are all incompetent. England Cricket is finished unless there is a wholesale clear out at the ECB. Not sure how the new man will get rid of them all but that is what needs to happen.
Do have a look at Jonathan Liew’s piece in Telegraph. It’s a corker! I think he really has lost the plot completely. He’s getting a real pasting!
Excellent article Maxie. With you on almost all of it. Only difference is that I see Cook as a victim and not as one of the guilty party. I found Downton to be breathtakingly arrogant and dismissive. I doubt that he hates us. I imagine he barely gives us a second thought. He was brushing Simon Mann aside like a vaguely irritating fly or as James wrote earlier, a still wet behind the ears new office intern. He is an insufferably condescending and pompous prat. I hope he is not long in the job so that we can indeed all move on to a better and more successful and harmonious era.
I hope that Cook goes/stands down because it has become too painful to endure.
As I’ve said before Jenny….he’s the Lee Harvey Oswald of English cricket…”The Patsy”
Yeah.
Andrew Hughes on good form again:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/blogs/content/story/810987.html
“Downton has this week admitted that he made mistakes at that time, but went on to say that these mistakes were in the past, so there wasn’t any point talking about them, which is a useful argument should you ever find yourself up in front of a judge”.
Thanks for the tip! Fab! :)
Quite right that Cook is saved for Ashes. Has to be Ravi for ODI captain surely. We cannot further dilute the Essex influence.
Ooh yes, please pick Cook for the Ashes.
I think the fact that he said he would be surprised if Cook wasn’t captain at WC tells me he wants us to think it doesn’t have anything to do with him, it is down to selectors. He has given this interview and probably won’t emerge from under the stone for another year. He doesn’t have to explain his U turn, just as slimy as I thought he was.
Good point Vanessa – is Downton only employed on a 2-3 day a year contract – seems like it?
My cat doesn’t just pick over the bones, he eats them!
I’ve said it before here, since GM stood down as Chairman of selectors, GC has been able to ensure that easily manipulated puppets are in key ECB positions. Does anyone really think that in Downton, Whitaker,Moores and Farbrace we have the best in the world – or even in England! – in those key positions? The results are there for us all to see – although we don’t necessarily agree with Downton’s interpretation of them!
Also, where are the fearless men of the Press when we need them? The reporting – or lack of it – from the likes of Agnew and Selvey as these events have unfolded over the last year has sold cricket short. There’s more to journalism – without even biting the hand that feeds you – than simply dutifully reproducing press releases and tugging your forelock as Mr Downton graciously consents to grant you an audience!
Part of how Downton is able to brush all this off is that the press, once again, resembled nothing so much as a pack of teddy bears.
Some individuals (e.g. Mann) didn’t do badly, but the inability of the press, as a whole, to frame the issue, to regularly write about it and put pressure on the ECB is a big part of why in these interviews Downton is able to brazen it out. He doesn’t have to answer the questions we want answering because no-one is ever holding him to account.
Mike Selvey writes an article in much the same vein as this – analytical, thorough,proportionate, prepared to demand accountability, equity and fairness ….
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/blog/2014/dec/18/cricket-in-2014-10-memorable-moments
How this tired and pensionable bloke still has a job is anybody’s guess but then he’s apparently on the ‘inside’ – totally delusional is my take on him, nasty, bullying and an Andrew Strauss.
“Nothing was more succinct than the handful of sharp words uttered by Andrew Strauss, and heard by television viewers, all the more poignant for his brief comment being inadvertent. Strauss was an England captain of the utmost integrity, in no small part driven into the ground and ultimately out of the game, by an unmanageable individual. He more than anyone can be listened to”.
Selvey’s No.7. As clivejw said about a previous Brenkley article, this is basically “I think he was a c*** too”. “Difficult year”, “young guns” and “chucking” make appearances as well.
No mention of Strauss’s epic loss of form then? Or that our toothless bowling strategy foundered on a batting side who (Amla most of all) couldn’t be bored out?
As I said over the road earlier, there are some real corkers in Selvey’s piece.
Get your sick bucket ready.
‘[Cook’s] enemies post-Pietersen have been vociferous and relentless. There are supporters too though, and the reception he received in the Test against India at the Ageas Bowl was moving”.
I think that speaks for itself. Plus:
“The majority of cricket followers want him back to what he was”.
If by what he was, Selvey means ‘not the captain’, then yes, the majority of followers certainly want that.
What Selvey essentially means is that all the zillions of upset people don’t represent real supporters, but the few hundreds in a quarter-full Ageas Bowl do.
Hasn’t Selvey, in essence, called Strauss a liar? I am sure it was not his intention of course as he clearly states that Strauss is a man of “integrity”.
This is what Strauss has put on record: Strauss, 35, said: “For me the driver to it all quite frankly was my form with the bat. In truth, I haven’t batted well enough for a long time now. I think I have run my race.”
He denied his decision to quit was influenced by the furore over Kevin Pietersen’s axing from the team….Strauss added: “I am extremely proud of everything I have achieved as a cricketer and I have found myself very fortunate to play in an era when some of English cricket’s greatest moments have occurred. I have loved every minute of it.
“It hasn’t been something that occurred overnight. It has built over a few months. I would like to go out on my own terms with my head held high and I think this is the right time.”
The retirement of Strauss will be overshadowed to an extent by the unsavoury controversy involving star batsman Pietersen.
Strauss was said to be the subject of “provocative” text messages that Pietersen sent to South African players during England’s 3-0 series defeat by the Proteas.
But Strauss was insistent he had made a decision about his future before the news of the texts broke on the eve of his 100th Test match at Lord’s.
“I first spoke to Andy Flower about it prior to the Kevin Pietersen incident rearing its head,” he said. “It just hasn’t been a consideration.
“I first spoke to Andy about this a few weeks ago and said I’m considering it and would talk to him at end of the South Africa series. By the time I spoke to him again, my mind was made up and I think he knew that.”
I’ve asked why, in the absence of cast-iron proof, why Mr Selvey is contradicting his man of “integrity” in his piece. Not modded yet. A great many have now been modded. The Guardian certainly doesn’t like anyone to question Mr Selvey’s pieces. I think the Guardian and Mr Selvey are playing a very dangerous “game!”
Great spot, and great points Annie – thank you. As you say, Selvey has made a vindictively erroneous and unsubstantiated claim. Strauss did not retire because Pietersen was in a contretemps with Hugh Morris. Neither did he quit over a text message he never saw – and even if he did, more fool him.
Thanks also for your kind words below.
Yeah Selvey is at it again. I just posted a comment on his page, it was modded within minutes and I got a message saying I was being pre modded from now on. I just mentioned the high number of posts deleted on his articles and asked if anyone could confirm the rumour that Pringle was being sacked and that I think a few more were in dereliction of their journalistic duties.
You little beauty Vanessa!
Downton and the ECB-friendly press often repeat the mantra that it is only a vocal minority of fans who are dissatisfied with the decisions to sack KP and back Cook’s captaincy. I heard Etheridge and Brenckley dismissing such fans as being ‘on social media’ as though normal and sober cricket lovers would never deign to post anything on Twitter. They seem to be convinced that there’s a silent majority out there who are impressed by Downton’s decision-making skills.
It’s a curious way of approaching the issue; for journalists to assume that vocal opinions on social media are unrepresentative and can be ignored whilst the sensible, pro-ECB, views of the ‘ordinary cricket fan’ can be gleaned from a year-long silence broken only by a round of applause for Cook’s 95 at Southampton.
Do they know that even my mother’s generation are on Facebook now? Arguably the traditional press are now very much serving a minority audience…
As I’ve said on Dmitri’s site, I’m normally part of the silent majority. I do NOT agree with Brenkley and his ilk and their assumption that, just because the likes of me are reluctant to use social media, we must agree with them is extremely annoying.It actually has more to do with being an old dog to whom new tricks do not come easy!
Kevin Pietersen sends out reminder to England selectors after impressing for Melbourne Stars in Big Bash League. Kevin Pietersen, the former England batsman, hit an impressive innings of 66 runs off 46 balls for the Melbourne Stars at the Adelaide Oval on Thursday.
The controversial England exile had a best of 39 in 12 matches for Surrey in last year’s NatWest T20 Blast, but rediscovered his form against Adelaide Strikers, hitting four sixes and two fours in his 44-ball stay.
Another out-of-favour Englishman, Luke Wright, was the only other player to reach double figures in the Stars’ 148 for seven, the Sussex all-rounder hitting 45 in 37 deliveries.
Pietersen hooked his second ball for six and added two more maximums from successive deliveries immediately after the bowler, Kieron Pollard, aborted his run-up in response to an attempted switch-hit.
A single took him to his half-century in 38 balls and he added one more six off Laughlin before lobbing Kane Richardson to midwicket in the final over of the innings.
Just seen highlights of KP’s sixes in the Big Bash on Sky News. The Aussie commentators were pissing themselves laughing as to why he’s not playing for England in the World cup!
Well, we don’t need his sort in the England side.
Who does he think he is, hitting 6s and 4s and all that. Showoff!
Plus, and this is very important, he went to the wrong school and comes from the wrong family.
Rav, don’t forget the clincher which is unforgivable in their eyes – that he speaks with a pronounced Afrikaans Accent!
No he doesn’t! He’s from Pietermaritzberg!
Apologies, but to my untrained ears it sounded like it – Although it would still be a strike against him – because he is not not and does not sound English!
and in any case that nice man Cook hit a 6 the other day, proving without doubt that we don’t need anyone like KP :-p
If we’d kept Pietersen, we would not have had the “fantastic environment” which enabled England to lose 5-2 in Sri Lanka.
With Pietersen in the camp, there’s no way we could have brought on all these new players, as Michael Carberry explains in the Independent today (thanks to Simon H for posting this link on Dmitri’s, where I saw it).
“As I said on social media, this so-called ‘altercation’ that myself and Kevin Pietersen are supposed to have had, well, I guess I’m still waiting for that memo from the ECB to make me aware of this altercation because it’s news to me.
“I’ve known Kevin a long time, since he came over from South Africa, and I don’t think in the years we’ve played with or against each other, we’ve ever had a cross word. He’s arguably one of the greatest batsman I’ve ever seen and England has ever produced. He was generous with his time and his advice on the tour. That went for anyone else who was on the trip as well.”
http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/cricket/michael-carberry-after-such-a-tough-time-im-not-sure-i-will-stay-in-the-game-9932189.html
Actually they were pissing themselves because KP was “mic’d up” and was surprisingly funny. He made several astute comments about the state of the game as well as being quick to offer support to Rose after his first over got spanked – looked like a team player to me.
Well, if there’s one thing that we definitely DON’T need, it’s one of the greatest batsman we’ve ever seen. Period.
Not been here for a while but sad to find the blog is still trapped in the same self-perpetuating circular discussion.
In reality neither Cook or KP are the answer for the World Cup, the former probably only in the side as he’s upset less people than the latter.
Unfortunately Cook’s bizarre selection for the ODI team is (rightly or wrongly) giving the KP story legs, when it really has run it’s course. I do sympathise with the indignation over Cooks selection though and hope beyond hope the selectors have the clarity of thought to do what’s right.
The bottom line as a cricket fan is, with both, one of or neither of them in the side at the world cup I want Eng to do well, regardless of who plays, coaches or sits on the board.
Hi P of P – nice to have you back. In fact, we’ve not really had the KP in/out argument for a while here, and the original post wasn’t really about. It’s arisen on the thread because of what Michael Carberry said today, and I do think that was worth flagging up. If the boss of team is being so furtive about making such a massive call, and cites vague reasons – and then one of the players comes out and essentially invalidates all of that, to my mind that is noteworthy. Downton is fibbing, and treating us like idiots.
Yes, the argument is circular, but why? It’s hard to move on Pietersen because those events still define the present. Assuming Cook will be picked after all, it will be because of Pietersen – they can’t afford to admit they were wrong, and lose face.
Maxie,
You may be right about Downton’s motives – but it’s perfectly possible to believe both that getting rid of KP was (marginally) the right thing to do, and that Cook should go as soon as possible. They’re not mutually exclusive viewpoints. In fact I’d venture to suggest that a substantial number hold that exact view – although obviously not many on here :)
Yes, why on earth we need KP and his entertainment and 6s and 4s is beyond me, particularly given how well we’re doing without him these day and the now harmonious dressing room (very, very important).
Kev, But why did KP go? Because he wasn’t any good anymore?or because the ECB can’t handle individuals with big personalities?
If it’s the later, then these mistakes will be repeated again and again. It also may explain why there is a dearth of new leaders. English cricket doesn’t seem to like people who rock the boat or want to go against laptop theory.
Listen to Mark Butcher talking about how our bowlers have become regimented with laptop theory and now seem to only bowl short pitched bowling at the end of ODI games. Are they bowling by instinct according to the conditions and opposition batsman? Or have they been drilled to bowl what the coach says? It has become very fashionable to keep dismissing the KP issue but the reasons for his sacking go to the heart of England’s problems.
For example, could it be they won’t give the ODI captaincy to Morgan because they are worried he will go and play IPL cricket? This would then bring back the whole KP farce again. England are so compromised with ECB politics that simple cricket is being dictated to by outside issues. KP was just a symptom of the flaws.
“English cricket doesn’t seem to like people who rock the boat”.
Notice who didn’t perform in SL? Morgan, Hales and Stokes – they have to take some responsibility but is it a coincidence that the flair players all massively underachieved? The players who don’t need to be told to “work harder” but need “be fearless”? Buttler was also looking pretty ground down by the end.
“Listen to Mark Butcher talking about how our bowlers have become regimented with laptop theory and now seem to only bowl short pitched bowling at the end of ODI games”.
One of his many excellent insights. The contrast between England and New Zealand yesterday was stark. Bowlers who could think, a new captain learning the ropes and a wise old head in Vettori there to offer advice.
NZ really are experimenting in their series and are drawing 2-2. All this guff about how England lost because of experimentation boils down to playing Stokes instead of Tredwell in one game. Not exactly the world turned upside down! If Root was captain, Roy and Vince batting and Rashid and a young quickie (say Mills or Roland-Jones) bowling then it could be called experimental.
Interesting point about it being the flair players who are under achieving. Flair does tend to come with an element of risk but for everyone bar Root and occasionally Ali all under achieving at the same time suggests that something is clearly going seriously wrong.
Good player is Rashid, would love him to get a chance in the test side seems to be constantly overlooked…
I’d like to see Rashid in the ODI side, too.
Would complement Tredwell on pitches that offered anything to spin, and is a very useful bat.
Mark,
Been wanting to reply to this and haven’t had time.
I’ve always thought the “England can’t handle mavericks” argument is a bit simplistic when it comes to KP. For a start it fails to explain why he was picked for 104 tests over 9 years, and was offered the captaincy. That’s not the career of a thwarted free spirit. It also fails to explain why the likes of Swann and Prior (also “big personalities”) flourished under the Flower environment, whereas KP became sullen and isolated.
I don’t think he was sacked because he’s a big personality. I think he was sacked because he was seen – rightly or wrongly – as showing contempt for the established authorities within the team. Flower. Moores. Strauss. Prior. 2 coaches. 1 captain. 1 vice captain. Cook appears to be a weathervane so who knows what he thought? But I suspect relations weren’t great. So add another captain to the list.
You can be a maverick, an individual and a personality without consistently undermining and showing contempt for the people in charge. If you p*ss off your bosses for long enough, eventually you will get moved on, no matter who you are. I’ve always thought the KP situation was as simple as that.
That said, I agree with you that England’s plans have become too rigid, and we seem to have lost the ability to think on our feet. The environment may well have been too stifling. But you can only fix that if you’re inside the tent pissing out, rather than outside pissing in.
I think the same Kev as I’m sure you know by now. Just thought I would offer support as the two if us are often, but not always, the only alternative voices. Love you all at the Full Toss. Wouldn’t be without you!
Jenny,
What I find frustrating about the current state of debate is that so many of the arguments are so black and white. KP’s axing was clearly wrong, and if you can’t see that, you’re an ECB stooge. Moores is a dolt and Mickey Mouse would be a better alternative – same for Cook as test captain.
I don’t see any of the arguments like that. They’re all messy, marginal decisions that could be argued either way, and the one eyed nature of many of the arguments on here just undermines the validity of some of the good points made. To me, Cook’s removal from the ODI side is the only clear cut decision of all of them – and I totally agree that Downton and his selectors deserve serious criticism for getting it wrong.
But the rest? Toss ups at best, and the jury is still out on all three of them. I agree on one thing though. Eventually the verdict will come in on the field. And if it turns out that Moores is not the man, and Cook cannot rediscover his form – then Downton should absolutely pay with his job.
Well said, in agreement again.
Slow to reply because something has gone amiss with my email notifications. The most current is in my inbox but just discovered all that I did not pick up at the time of arrival in my trash! Being automatically deleted. Will have to try and get it sorted.
I read the Carberry article and it sounded like the bitter offloading of someone not selected by England, which is understandable when you feel you’ve been hard done by but it’s the selectors job and prerogative who they select, I don’t think he does himself any favours in the interview.
I think me and Kev stand alone on here in the view that the England ODI side needs to move on from both Cook and KP.
If Cook is continually selected I’ll whole heartedly join in the indignation but if we must discuss KP in the context of the world cup squad let’s not forget his words from back in 2012, “I think it is the right time to step aside and let the next generation of players come through to gain experience for the World Cup in 2015”
thoroughly tedious – doesn’t have any real understanding of the issues and their complexity so my only conclusion is that you must be Downton …. right??
Apologies for my lack of understanding, I’ll refrain from submitting comment and content myself with reading your razor sharp cat analogies.
Please, lads, let’s cool off.
Carberry’s issue was the manner in which he was dropped.
http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/mar/31/michael-carberry-ashley-giles-england-kevin-pietersen-ashes
Asked if he had been contacted by England’s management since the end of the Ashes tour, Carberry said: “No. Nothing – which is disappointing but it’s the way they tend to do things. I don’t think it’s me alone saying this sort of thing. There have been players before me and players now who have felt the same thing.”
Obviously it is the selectors prerogative to choose who is playing.
Unless you think it also their prerogative to be utterly disrespectful to players who in their opinion have not quite made the grade, then Carberry has a point.
If Cook is continually selected…
If ??
Well I think he has every reason to be bitter, like a lot of others who have been discarded or messed about. Taylor comes in at no 3, makes 90, and then a 50 and they have already started messing him about. Dropping him down the order. Hales is in and out. Same with Ravi, now Bell.
It’s all very well being snarky about players who are dropped, but when a certain player carries on regardless of how crap his form is FOR 2 YEARS I would be pretty pissed off.
England are a shambles. The selection policy is crap. The tactics are crap. The coaching theory is crap. The computer says bowl short so they bowl short. The computer says score 230 and you win. These people are paid small fortunes for this idiocy. But hey, it’s all KPs fault.
No need to move on from KP when he’s still entertaining paying customers with 4s and 6s for fun.
What is the definition of a real England cricket follower? A person who pays for a ticket? Or a freeloading cricket writer?
When was the last time Selvey paid to watch an England test match? Does he pay for his travel expenses to the ground, and his overpriced food and drink? Or is all that picked up by The Guardian? Does he sit in a cheap plastic bucket seat with a crap view, or does he lord it with the ECB royalty? How many cups of coffee and classes of wine are brought along by ECB officials to keep him sweet?
I never realised the Guardian had become such a supporter of Privilege and entitlement.
the Guardian’s cricket policy is to support the ECB. They only allow one article with comments so that all comments are focused on one article rather than being spread over several – even if there is different topics being discussed. The Guardian only accepts tweets from the gliterati (self defined) and will not post mails from fans on the outside on its matchday reports.The Guardian will not accept any criticism of the ECB, Alastair Cook and Peter Moores – those comments will be removed if they offer ‘personal’ criticism. Guardian journalists are at liberty to argue with and oppress any commenter who offers alternate views to their own. Of all the current ‘newspapers’ (joke, I know) the Guardian is the most unashamedly oppressive. To say nothing of its new format
Quite right, I just asked Guardian under the freedom of information act, what percentage of comments of Selvey articles are moderated compared to all other Guardian writers. I don’t expect an answer anytime soon.
My comments don’t even appear at the Guardian anymore. I stopped reading articles there ages ago and only read the sensible stuff BTL. But as that’s being airbrushed from history, I won’t bother reading anything there at all.
It does seem that way doesn’t it? Presumably if you want to be with the “insiders” then you have to whistle the tune? Otherwise you become an “outsider?” I find it really disturbing that the Guardian would mod comments that are asking questions. Mr Selvey has made an allegation in point 7 against KP that is contrary to what Strauss himself has said. One of two things has happened: Strauss is using Selvey to have another pop at KP, or Selvey is just making it all up? Something is most definitely wrong. What I just cannot understand is how the Guardian allows Mr Selvey to write stuff as truth with no evidence. Okay if the piece is called “an opinion” but to pass it off as journalism seems really terrible to me. Then again it happens all of the time these days whereby “journalism” is nothing more or less than innuendo, lies and deceit.
Thanks guys for great pieces and allowing this old gal to have my say. You have a brill blog. So grateful.
Mark – these are the very points I’ve been making for years, although not specifically about Selvey. They form part of the reason we started the blog.
The mainstream cricket press can do some things we can’t do – they have some kind of access to the insiders, they get scoops, and the ones who played international cricket themselves will know more about high-level technique and strategy than most of us.
But too many of them have either forgotten or never knew what it’s like to be an ordinary punter. I’d wager that the likes of Selvey, Pringle, and maybe Atherton have never paid to go to a test match in their lives. For the likes of them, cricket is the cosy view from the press box, their mates in that press box, and in some cases their mates or old acquaintances in the ECB hierarchy.
That’s not the case with all of them.
I’m not an avid student of Selvey but he strikes me as a condescending snob who looks down his nose at the great unwashed. He seems to care much more for insiders than outsiders. He sees events through the lens of the professional cricketer, not of the supporter.
Nasser joins the chorus….
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/30529881
Nasser Hussein is a windbag, and so are the selectors for even discussing the matter.*
(*Brenkley)
If they do sack him, I hope they send out Whitaker to explain it. That guy’s interviews are much funnier than Downton’s.
This is getting more and more amusing! Gotta laugh. Saves going mad or maybe adds to it.
Did Brenkley actually call Nasser Hussein a “windbag?” Gee whiz I missed that. Well if these people can attack one of the great cricketers who lead our national team really well then what else is he capable of saying? Just really horrible.
Well, bugger me! Even Simon (Downton is my old team mate doncha know) Hughes, as analysed, and has finally come out of the closet and announces that that thoroughly nice gentlemanly chap, very much the modern day cricketer needs to be dropped!
Momentum is building (as they say!)