It’s not only the ECB who have come under heavy fire from England supporters over the last few months. A great many bloggers, Twitter users, and newspaper discussion-board commenters, including us, have criticised several high-profile figures in the mainstream cricket media for their coverage of the Pietersen controversy.
The feeling – one I have openly shared – is that influential journalists have not asked enough of the difficult questions which demand answers. Often they’ve appeared out of touch with the England fan-base, and too ready to accept the ECB line at face value – in support of which they cite undisclosed information they’ve obtained off the record. That approach in itself makes the reader feel even more disenfranchised.
There are numerous items on the charge sheet. In general the media has wrongly attributed public bitterness to a hero-worship of Kevin Pietersen rather than to the real cause – anger at the ECB’s arrogance, pomposity, and betrayal.
Derek Pringle referred to the “rants of keyboard warriors on social media“, which underlined another problem – the widely dismissive press attitude to the likes of you and me. here on sites like this. I don’t believe the tens of thousands of anti-ECB comments on various platforms are just the work of a niche minority, unrepresentative of the wider English cricketing public. There are simply far too many complaints, from far too many people, for that to be true.
Most of the biggest cricket media names are ex-players, which has given rise to another talking point. As ex-professionals, they have a priceless insight into the realities of top-level cricket, and valuable access to today’s players and administrators. The flip-side is a perception (not necessarily justified) that they may view events through the same lens as the people they’re writing about, not of the people they’re writing for.
Tensions have built and built; fur has flown.
By referencing BBC cricket correspondent Jonathan Agnew in the headline and photo above, I certainly do not mean to single him out for criticism or suggest he dominates this particular agenda. Instead, it’s because of something rather unexpected – Aggers made contact with me directly, in a bid to resolve those tensions and defuse this febrile atmosphere. I also need to correct an error I made at his expense.
Pringle, the Guardian’s Mike Selvey, and the Daily Mail’s Paul Newman, have probably received the most stinging criticism, but Aggers has possibly taken the most flak numerically. This may be due to his higher profile as a broadcast personality, and also his greater Twitter presence. We have only mentioned him, fairly briefly, a couple of times on this blog, but I have myself criticised him on Twitter quite regularly, often directly – along the lines of the issues mentioned above.
Last Friday, the day after his TMS interview with Paul Downton – which itself triggered a flurry of trenchant social media analysis – Aggers got in touch. He wants to clear the air with the bloggers, Tweeters and commenters who’ve taken hotly-expressed umbrage, such as me.
I appreciated him making an effort, especially at such a micro-level. I can’ t think of many others in his position who would do the same. We agreed that it would be constructive to create a dialogue and look at things from each other’s points of view.
(As you can tell, I am desperately trying to avoid using the term ‘engagement’, which neither of us actually said but was the jargon elephant in the room).
Aggers also wanted to flag up an inaccuracy in something I reported on Twitter. Last Thursday afternoon I live-Tweeted the Downton interview, summarising the main points, including this:
#Downton on @bbctms – Agnew says public who complained about KP sacking “unbalanced”.
— The Full Toss (@thefulltoss) May 22, 2014
What Aggers actually said was, in reference to the KP-gate reaction:
“A voluble portion of people out there in social media land, not necessarily entirely balanced in my experience”.
Aggers asked me to make it clear that he does not consider Pietersen’s supporters themselves to be unbalanced, but that the arguments on social media are not always balanced. Any implication to the contrary is without foundation.
With that cleared up, we discussed the idea of him having a conversation with us, to be published here on TFT, to discuss the issues I mentioned at the beginning of this post. I hope to speak to him later this week, and will post it as soon as possible afterwards.
Maxie, aside from not being the first person to have to print a ‘correction’, it is awesome that you have this opportunity to speak with Aggers. I will read your article with even greater interest. What I (we?) all want to know is whether there is something of substance behind the KP issue, or if it is just they decided they didn’t want him anymore because it was ‘just too difficult’.
If Aggers says so, I’d trust him.
My view is that it is beginning to dawn on Aggers that his disconnect with the public and their perception of bias and over-cosiness with the ECB over KP is losing him their support and putting his career at risk. The solution is not to try to justify himself to you, although this is welcome. The solution is to realise that he is biased, change the nature of his relationship with the ECB and the public school, cricket establishment groupthink which has caused this debacle, and stop being biased. Chumminess and banter is for the ball-by-ball TMS commentary. His entirely separate task as the BBC’s cricket correspondent is where he is falling short of the expected standards. He must be – and be seen to be – a dispassionate skeptical Paxman-esque interlocuor asking the difficult questions on behalf of the public, not a chummy insider too close and friendly to the ECB, softballing his questions and accepting their line. Otherwise he will find his previously unassailable status as a national treasure, which is currently on trial, suddenly revoked.
And not just asking the diffcult questions, Aggers should also be probing and following up on the answers he is given, a proper cross-examination, testing their positions to destruction.
Aggers is also becoming increasingly irascible and prickly on Twitter, often mistaking reasoned argument and justified criticism as “hostility” and blocking people willy-nilly. There has to come a point where he realises, “If I have a problem with almost everyone, the problem is me”.
Do we know Paxman’s views on anything? About WW1 perhaps, but not much else. he just takes the opposing point of view to test everyone’s arguments. We do know Aggers’s views though, through twitter and TMS. And this is a problem when he has his cricket correspondent hat on. We don’t really know David Bond’s views. Martin Brundle negotiates the line pretty well, but the job of pundit is different from correspondent. Perhaps the problem here is Aggers’s role needs to be split, and we need a separate cricket correspondent.
Erm…Aggers does his job as a TMS commentator rather well, in my opinion, and well worthy of being borderline “National Treasure”. He is quintessentially English in his approach to his job and therefore, by nature, not an “attack dog”…however…in his cosy comfortable world, all is not well, and has been slow to recognise the burgeoning and powerful anti establishment feelings amongst the ordinary, and oft fleeced and disconnected, ticket buying cricket lover! He has been biased, and undoubtedly manipulated to be, more sympathetic towards the suits and blazers, whom by sheer blatant self interest, monumental hypocrisy, and bungling ineptitude and weaselry, have done much to solidify the rebellion against them. I really do hope that after his conversation with Maxie we get a more succinct and balanced commentator and journalist?
You are absolutely right about Aggers being a fantastic TMS commentator. But when he has talked about KP saga he has dropped into the same trap as a lot of the others. He is not the worst culprit in any way shape or form. But he just follows the line the ECB want him to swallow. Despite my being banned from one of his threads for asking a question I do not feel any different. At least Aggers let me stay on the other Twitter thread. Ahh. My memories go back to the times with Aggers and Johnson commentating. Such brilliant times. I used to watch the TV with the sound off and listen to radio commentary which was so brilliant. I do hope, as you have said so well, that Aggers will be willing to engage to with us on the crucial questions. That would be a real breakthrough. Well done Maxie!!!
I worked for many years in an Internet related job and saw plenty of carping criticism of it from the press – totally in character. The Internet, like most IT only enacts what we already do, just faster and more efficiently. Don’t know if they still exist but we used to have Letters To The Editor, the Beeb’s Points of View etc and many people do still talk to each other in cricket clubs, pubs, on the street (although not the same ones as Alistair Cooke). Social media is merely another channel.
The press is probably the most negative media of the lot. Ask Graham “Turnip” Taylor, David Beckham, Victoria Beckham and any politician how balanced and supportive the press behaves. Wish pringle would go away and find something useful to do.
I support gw74. Agnew and co have to be neutral and Paxmanesque in dealing with the ECB. L’affaire Pietersen has been shambolic from the establishment side. I do hope they will show some humility and retract their stubborness. And more importantly cricket on terrestrial TV will give a long term boost to English cricket, else it will only be more and more public schoolboys and their limited talents.
Brilliant analysis! It is the drip drip of venomous talk from the ECB that has been the trigger for all this stuff. The ECB is and always will be – whilst this present lot are in charge – the authors of the collapse of England Cricket. When these buffoons call the fans “outsiders” then what is one to assume from that? One thing liars have to have is a very good memory. Thankfully this lot haven’t got very good memories at all which is why they maintain the accolade of being PR disasters. As if it isn’t bad enough that they do not know the definition of being “disinterested!” It isn’t rocket science to see that due to their unprofessional actions – probably engendered by their knee-jerk reactions; vengeful actions due to Flower who had become a dinosaur in his latter years; their arrogance in believing that they were and still are “fireproof” that has brought them to this unpalatable place. I truly believe that Clark and Downton never ever thought that the public would react in this way and see around their dripping venom. They did really believe that we swallow it whole. Clever PR man would have made sure that the right stuff leaked at the right time. This crew of clowns were too arrogant to think through their course of action. The real loser is England Cricket and its future. Whilst these morons remain in charge I am not sure anything will change the feeling from a great many people that England Cricket is doomed.
Errr when did we expect journalists, particular those who “commentate” to be impartial (indeed Paxman is often not impartial but provacative taking the contrary position). The daily newspapers are full of commentary and opinion. Indeed we welcome their opinion – it would seem odd if Agnew et al did not offer their views on whether, say, Gurney is good enough for England or who should be in the England test team against SL.
Agnew and all the other Cricket commentators offer their opinions, for us to agree, disagree with and debate. This is, after all, the rational of TFT. It is for each of us to decide who’ve view we favour (Atherton over Hussian, Boycott over Bumble etc).
it may be that anti-establishment feeling is en vogueat present and those, in the cricket world, who are (small c) conservative are feeling the brunt. I respect Agnew’s view, he is thoughtful and insightful, yet I don’t always agree with him – that doesn’t make him wrong and me right. On KP, I certainly am not of the establishment. KP would be one of the first names on the team sheet. Agnew seems to believe otherwise – there are plenty who’d agree with him.
The crux seems to be that either he knows something we don’t and he should share it, or he should be someone he is not (Paxman) when interviewing ECB officials. On the former, may be he does know something which justifies the ECB’s stance but reporting it may betray a confidence (the ECB’s conduct post sacking has hardly been warmly endorsed here and elsewhere). Until the ECB desired confidentiality agreement expires in Nov, we probably won’t know. As for a different interview style, it simply isn’t Agnew’s style or persona – can you imagine Paxman doing a view from the boundary? Let’s not ask him to be someone he isn’t (after all it didn’t work elsewhere…)
New to the blog. Excellent job you’ve all done!
As a Guardian man myself, Mike Selvey has gone from an excellent writer in my eyes, to a thoroughly unpleasant individual. His treatment of anyone who has questioned his knowledge of the KP issue has been disgraceful, preferring to mock them and pick out technicalities in their argument rather than answering the questions put to him…. this all started with the rather transparent ECB leaks which set in motion the “Textgate” scandal, and has continued on as the whole sorry affair unfolded.
Whilst I am sure the article is right, and that reliance on the ECB for off the record chats is partially responsible for the media line being towed by Aggers et al, I think a fair chunk of it is personal. No-one enjoys criticism, especially when aimed at their profession, and it’s a pretty natural defense to dismiss anyone with a contrary view.
Unfortunately, the media on this occasion seem to have found themselves the wrong side of the fence as far as public opinion goes.
Brilliant analysis! It is the drip drip of venomous talk from the ECB that has been the trigger for all this stuff. The ECB is and always will be – whilst this present lot are in charge – the authors of the collapse of England Cricket. When these buffoons call the fans “outsiders” then what is one to assume from that? One thing liars have to have is a very good memory. Thankfully this lot haven’t got very good memories at all which is why they maintain the accolade of being PR disasters. As if it isn’t bad enough that they do not know the definition of being “disinterested!” It isn’t rocket science to see that due to their unprofessional actions – probably engendered by their knee-jerk reactions; vengeful actions due to Flower who had become a dinosaur in his latter years; their arrogance in believing that they were and still are “fireproof” that has brought them to this unpalatable place. I truly believe that Clark and Downton never ever thought that the public would react in this way and see around their dripping venom. They did really believe that we swallow it whole. Clever PR man would have made sure that the right stuff leaked at the right time. This crew of clowns were too arrogant to think through their course of action. The real loser is England Cricket and its future. Whilst these morons remain in charge I am not sure anything will change the feeling from a great many people that England Cricket is doomed.
just be careful you are not ‘bought off’ by the stardom
A good point! I don’t think I was – but I do have to give him a lot of credit for doing something like this, and within parameters which I control, not him.
And another thing (last one I promise!) all this stuff about off-the-record info/dossier which people so relish reminding us about. I don’t have an MA in Journalism from City University but surely the point of off-the-record info is to lead you to evidence which confirms it which you then publish. You know, “journalism”.
“trust us” and “everyone needs to move on” are not things I remember Bernstein and Woodward saying.
Wow. That is brilliant. Twoud be good to Aggers to have a dialogue about this stuff. I must confess that I did go for him when he was on twitter. He was still going on about KP. I think I said something like: “Oh Aggers do give it a rest. You are really getting on my nerves with this KP stuff.” His reply was something like, Alright then I won’t. Very polite I thought. Unlike the one I got from Mr Pringle. Mind you I did accuse him of sucking up to his mates at the ECB and was he after a job with all his support of them and his non-evidenced accusations about KP. Ooh he was very vexed. One of the problems with these people is that they like to dish it out to the public but do not like to receive complaints about the errors of their ways! Oh no indeed. They want us to swallow their stuff whole and agree with it like good, zombie-like, citizens. After all they were cricketers – well that’s probably pushing reality a bit in Pringle’s case – and therefore they are the experts!
It is the arrogance of people like Pringle where he makes a statement that has no evidence to underpin his assertions. When you ask him how he could make a conclusion without any real evidence you get nothing back.
Like this one:
‘Kevin Pietersen row: Not one England player wanted him to stay in the side, says Paul Downton – New managing director reveals that the dropped batsman had no supporters among his team-mates and that he was discarded because he would hinder the team’s growth!’ How can he get away with this stuff? The accusation is pretty stark isn’t it? When you question Pringle he doesn’t reply. Not ever. When you offer evidence from the players own mouths he doesn’t reply to that either. It is an utter disgrace that these former players can tell falsehoods and not be held accountable.
[…] Here’s our interview with BBC cricket correspondent Jonathan Agnew – the backstory for which is here. […]
I enjoyed watching KP bat from the very first time I saw him play against Kent (my team), batting at about number 7 and seen as mostly an all rounder. Even then you could see he had great talent. Since then he has played a number of great, and many good innings for England, his adopted country. But this has come at a cost, increasingly since his disastrous period as Captain. Personally I’d have said ‘thanks and good luck for the future’ after the Strauss/South Africans fiasco, but – to their credit, I guess – the ECB managed to get him back into the team. I suspect the ripples this caused never really died down and can be seen as behind the more recent problems.
Then came a new management for the ECB. No I must declare a (small) interest here – I was at school with Paul Downton, though he was not a close friend, nor have our paths crossed since. However given both his cricketing career and (very successful) business career, plus my memory of the young Downton as a remarkably level headed and calm individual, I simply don’t believe he would have come in to his current post with an anti-KP agenda – what could his motivation be? At the same time he must have been aware that he was taking the more difficult route in taking the England team forward – it would have been much easier not to have decided to leave KP out. Was he right? Perhaps we’ll only know when we see how the new, KP less England team plays over the next few years…
Nor do I believe that Mr Downton is a man blest with any skill in PR. He just cannot seem to help himself from causing yet another PR disaster. Downton forced KP to sign a “gagging” order and then broke the order he signed on behalf of the ECB. It was so blatant. Not only that but he has lied to the public. As Pringle’s article displays Downton says: Not one player wanted KP in the team?” How does that figure with what the players themselves have said? He may have been a good businessman, but on his current form I just don’t believe it. He and Clark have brought England Cricket and its reputation into disrepute. Never did I think I would see the day when such terrible things were done to one player. The whole situation could have and should have been dealt in a totally different way. It has been a disgrace. One minute Downton is saying that England Cricket needs to move on from KP but whenever an opportunity arises, Downton takes another pop at KP. This latest fiasco puts Downton and the ECB in the proverbial crap. Having forced KP into signing a “gagging” order, Downton believes he has the right to say what he wants even if it is untrue? That takes a lot of arrogance and/or stupidity. Then of course the fans are not considered to have the right of an opinion according to Downton and Clark. We’re just “outsiders!”
At the end of the day we can all make our own minds up about this, and I have to say that the ‘arrogance’ I’ve noticed hasn’t come from Paul Downton or the ECB, but very much from those who seem to speak for KP, and also many of his supporters. It seems that some people can’t accept that the team is going to move on without KP.
Many thanks for all your comments, and sorry not to reply before – was tied up yesterday with the Aggers interview and then processing it to get it online.
Many of you have never commented here before and are probably new visitors to this blog. Thanks for taking a look and I hope you’ll find something of interest.
Giles – maybe it is far-fetched to suppose that Downton arrived in the job with an ant-KP agenda. But that’s almost what he’s said himself – stressing that after the Melbourne test the two burning issues were Flower’s future, and KP’s. How on earth was KP the main problem at that stage – not Cook’s captaincy, or the total collapse of the batting, Swann retired, no third seamer.
Ian – thanks for your kind words. I know what you mean about Selvey. He has not emerged from this well – and he is being heavily criticised absolutely everywhere. Being opposed is one thing, but when you’re uniformly upsetting everyone, the plot has been lost. I find him rather condescending – he seems to think us “outside cricket”.
Aggers of course can only speak for himself, not the written press. Perhaps we should approach Selvey, Pringle and Newman for a three way interview!
I am not a supporter of KP as such, but I know when I am being hoodwinked and lied to. Moving on from KP is not the point. The point is very much the drip drip tarnishing of a player – who gave so much to England Cricket – and his reputation being further destroyed by Downton & Clark. It is the ECB who said they wanted to move on, but it is the ECB that cannot seem to stop itself from continuing along its vengeful path. Downton told a blatant lie to the press and he has been caught out in it. Clark is not much better. Between them they have managed to bring England cricket into disrepute. You don’t force a player you have just sacked to sign an agreement that prevents the player from saying anything about anything, whilst simultaneously believing that you have the right to say whatever you want. Downton has shown himself to be utterly unprofessional at best and completely contemptible of the “gagging” order he forced on KP, at worst. I can move on like the best of them but I just don’t believe we are being told the truth by the ECB. The ECB could have told KP that they wanted to end his contract without any of this stuff going on. One thing is for sure, this stuff would never have happened had Vaughan been the captain. None of it. The only ones to blame for this fiasco, and who have yet to take responsibility for their actions on behalf of the management failure. Choose to accuse us all of being KP fans and refusing to move on but this is about failed management choosing to blame one person for its failure.