KP: The Autobiography

There's a scene in The Simspons episode 'Homer at the Bat' where Bart and Lisa continually bait the baseball player Darryl Strawberry from the stands. Marge, their mother, chastises the children but Bart and Lisa respond with reasoning: that he's a professional athlete, that he's used to it and the taunting "rolls right off their backs". It then cuts to an image of Darryl Strawberry, sniffing and with a tear rolling down his cheek, reminding us that this mega-star of baseball is, in fact, a human being with feelings.

Throughout reading Pietersen's book I found myself thinking of this Simpsons scene. We, the spectators, sometimes all too easily forget that the people we are watching on the field in front of us are human beings, who can hear our criticisms, our insults and our praise. And then there were other times whilst reading it that I found myself expecting someone to be hit by a bus, like Regina George in the film Mean Girls.

It is, perhaps, one of the most frustrating books I have ever read. There were times when I would shout at it, throw it in a corner and refuse to pick it up again for an hour or so. But curiosity always got the better of me and I would find myself picking it up again and devouring it.

I admit to being a fan of Pietersen and someone who has always sympathised with him. It might be because I only started following cricket in 2004 and am not used to the conventional English cricketer, but there was something about him back then that I liked. I remember reading a quote in 2005 from Michael Vaughan stating something along the lines of all Pietersen wanted was a hug, some reassurance and suddenly I found myself sympathising with this larger than life character with the big, bold hair and wondered if there was something more to him than this 'ego' on show.

Pietersen himself admits something along those lines throughout the book. It is, as you would expect, an incredibly open and frank account of himself. We gain background knowledge of his childhood in South Africa, of his family life (with an account of his father that would probably be of great interest to many psychologists). His South African childhood and his battle with his national identity are always underlying, always a tension within himself and within the book. He states, on page 134, that "I'm not as cocky as my image suggests. I'm as insecure as the next bloke, and when I first played for England I was desperate to be accepted."

This desire for acceptance, this wanting to be seen as someone who he eventually realises he is not, is something that Pietersen regrets. He admits that "off the field, I'm a much quieter more solitary person than people imagine" (p225). It is clear that throughout Pietersen's career that he feels there has been this great misunderstanding around him. His need for constant reassurance is not met, admitting that he needs "someone to come along and tell me that I'm playing like a million dollars" as he describes himself as "very shallow" (p129). He is frustrated by the image created of him early in his career and is annoyed by how these early conceptions of him have not been disregarded with the more matches he has played.

Of course, he hasn't helped himself. The sagas in 2009 and 2012 are incredibly difficult to forget, soap operas that were embarrassing for all involved. But they are something, especially in the case of 2012, that he is apologetic about. However, he is a man who is frustrated and hurting. A man who looks at the conduct of some of his other professionals and wonders why they're not being punished like him for similar misdemeanours. A man who looks at his coach stepping down from ODI cricket and wonders why they are allowed to pick and choose their formats whereas he, a player in a similar position, is not. "It was one rule for one player and another rule for me" (p198) he says.

When he talks about the skills involved in playing cricket, it is an incredibly fascinating read. He talks about the technical side of the game, the adjustments that must be made when playing spin. At times, it does read like a love letter to the IPL but at others, you realise that maybe this is knowledge and experience that a lot of young English cricketers would benefit from. When he talks about the mental side of the game, it is again another interesting read. It gives an insight into the mind of and the pressures on the professional cricketer, especially a batsman. Pietersen says, on his seeming arrogance at the crease that "conveying arrogance at the wicket has always been about using my body language as a defence mechanism. Never let them [the opposition] see a weakness. Never let them know there is a war going on in your head" (p143). His insistence that he has helped to coach younger cricketers, his passion and commitment to practice (although, interestingly, mostly alone and on his own cricketing terms) and his knowledge and enthusiasm for the game all come through in these passages, which is what makes these parts, in a book filled with high school-esque drama, worth reading.

It would be easy to dismiss the claims in Pietersen's book as those of a bitter ex. Too easy. Because if you can wade through the endless 'buddies' and continual sniping and elements of his flashy life, then you come to realise that, at the heart of it, he may just have a point. One of the most interesting parts of the book comes in one of the early chapters, 'I Am Like a Hurricane. Not.' He states, "I don't do comfort zones, and if I feel like you are the kind of person who enjoys the comfort zone way of life, I tell you [...] I think me confronting mediocrity throughout my career has earned me this reputation of being destructive." (p117). This book is Pietersen's very public attempt at confronting the mediocrity that appears to be endemic in English cricket.

Yes, he's big, brash and not everyone's cup of tea, but rather than ignore or dismiss this autobiography, perhaps it should be used as a wake up call that English cricket is far too in its own comfort zone. Cricket, especially English cricket, needs big characters, who stand up for their beliefs, otherwise cricket will decline in this country. The English may well have invented this game, but it is the other nations that are rising up and making the game what it is today. And the longer it is that the powers that be in English cricket keep their heads in the sand, the worse off cricket, both in this nation and abroad, will be for it.

(All quotes come from Kevin Pietersen, KP: The Autobiography (St Ives: Sphere, 2014)

Sympathy for the Devil?

Calm before the storm: Pietersen celebrates his century for England at Headingley. 

From the moment he appeared on the England scene in 2004, Kevin Pietersen has always been a somewhat polarising player. It cannot be denied that he is an excellent cricketer, someone with the ability to change a match in a session, but his personality, one seemingly of brashness and arrogance, is one which rubs a lot of people up the wrong way. His desire to be appreciated and celebrity status has led to him making mistakes, and these mistakes may well have, potentially, drawn the curtains on his international career.

Having retired from international limited overs cricket in controversial circumstances earlier this year, Pietersen's feud with the ECB has escalated so rapidly over the past week that he now finds himself dropped from the England squad. The whole sorry saga began with him wanting to spend more time with his family, then it became about wanting to play a full IPL season and now it's turned into a ridiculous and almost high school drama about Twitter and text messages, the bane of every teenage girl's life.

Since rising to the top of the Test rankings last summer, things have not exactly been plain sailing for the good ship England. In October, whilst on a disastrous tour of India, Graeme Swann, another big personality in the England dressing room, published his autobiography in which he wasn't exactly complimentary about Kevin Pietersen's captaincy skills. In any working environment, cliques will form, and the England dressing room is almost certainly no different.

This being said, it's easy to not feel sorry for Pietersen. Outlandish videos and embarrassing press conferences mean he is a difficult person to understand. For example, his press conference at the IPL earlier this year, where he lamented the absence of some of his England colleagues because of 'second rate Australians', wasn't exactly greeted with rapturous applause. The video he released on Saturday was one to appease, but there was no hint of an apology within it and seemed to be done because he knew the axe was falling anyway. However, a key element of England's success over the past few years has been the management's ability to control the ego. The way in which details of these private meetings about his England future were leaked to the press was reminiscent of the fiasco of 2009 and means that trust between both parties has been broken.

Many have not forgiven Pietersen for this 2009 debacle. He forced a man out of his job, and also wanted his now coach gone too and this, undoubtedly, must have had an impact upon relationships in the dressing room. But there are two sides to every story, and it is incredibly important to remember that. Pietersen wants to continually come across as being the victim, and looking at previous history, it is possible to see why he feels this way. Earlier this year, Pietersen got fined for tweeting his opinion about Nick Knight's punditry. Stuart Broad also suggested that Knight's not very good at his job and nobody batted an eyelid. As stated, Swann was allowed to publish an autobiography in which he criticised some of his team mates. Pietersen may or may not have sent private texts, which either contained 'acceptable banter between team mates' (South Africa's Moosajee) or 'derogatory' remarks about his captain. The ECB, according to the South African camp, have not asked to see the texts but it was Pietersen's inability to deny their existence which saw him dropped from the squad. For those who label Pietersen as greedy, or think that he shouldn't be allowed to pick and choose his cricket, let us not forget that it's the ECB who got involved with Stanford, a man who now has a 110-year jail sentence for fraud. The people who let that happen are still employed by governing body. Let us also remember that the ECB allowed Andrew Strauss to skip the Bangladesh tour, although this helped him to be rested and be able to lead the team to the success in Australia.

Respect, though, has been lost on both sides. Pietersen, with his infamous Headingley press conference, alleged text messages which seem to be about his captain, YouTube video and perceived insult at the infamous @KevPietersen24 parody account, has lost the respect of the ECB, and his England teammates. The ECB has lost the respect of Pietersen through their leaks to the press and because he feels victimised. There must surely be more to come with this story, which may well be revealed once this Test series has concluded, but as it currently stands, it feels like an incredibly silly drama between two sides who are just as bad as one another. And it's easy to forget that there is a very important Test match starting on Thursday, because the feud between Pietersen and the ECB continues to be fought out in the playground-esque arena, and now Piers Morgan has appeared to egg them on in the background.

Pietersen being dropped may well mean that the squad return to some semblance of unity. Statements and newspaper columns from England players suggest that they're pleased Pietersen is not in the squad, and they believe they are better for it. His absence gives youngsters a chance to gain experience playing top quality international cricket and it also means that 'Team England' are able to pose for a photo with the Investec Zebra with a smile on their faces.

England managed to win ODI series against the West Indies and Australia without Pietersen, but these teams are not South Africa. With youngster Taylor, who impressed on debut at Headingley, and Bairstow returning to the squad despite questionable form since being worked over by Kemar Roach, England head into the Test at Lord's hoping that their team can come together and perform to overcome this strong and in form South Africa side. England won a must win Test without Kevin Pietersen against Australia at The Oval in 2009, but that side contained a demoralised Mitchell Johnson, not Dale Steyn.

Should England win, they retain their number one status. Should they lose or draw, England will lose that precious number one ranking, less than a year after they gained it, and all that hard work may well have gone to waste. There was talk of this side becoming one of the greatest England sides ever, there being a golden era for English cricket coming. Instead, in true English style, we have become our own worst enemy again and it may well lead to another long and gruelling winter.

Twitter and Cricket: #KnightGate

"I don't even know what it does", said Geoffrey Boycott on Test Match Special during the evening session of the latest Test with the West Indies. The microblogging social networking website of Twitter has grown in popularity and stature since its formation in 2006 and it has many fans. I, having grown up with websites like Bebo, MySpace and Facebook, am included in this and having had an account on the site for nearly three years, I spend a lot of time on it.

Twitter, like any social networking site on the internet, is a hive of information. What Boycott, and others, don't seem to understand is that it's a site for discussion, entertainment and sharing of knowledge. Some tweeters may well have a tendency to update you with what they had for breakfast, but others will have something genuinely interesting to say. Friendships can form on there. My passion for cricket and sport in general has allowed me to meet people who have similar interests to me and means that, finally, I have someone to watch sport with, something that never happened when I was younger.

Of course, my banal rambling aside, Twitter also provides a platform for the celebrity, politician or sports star to share details of their life. One of those characters is that of Kevin Pietersen, who this week got in trouble because of his comments about the Sky commentator, Nick Knight:

Now, I'm not really a big fan of Nick Knight's commentary style. I have nothing against him as a person and I will give credit where it's due, as he's improved since I saw him presenting my mum's ECB coaching videos, but there's just something about the way he commentates that I don't like. Of course, some people do like it. Others think Ian Botham is a superb commentator, others can't stand Henry Blofeld's love of pigeons and nobody is ever quite sure how they feel about Nasser Hussain. James Anderson has his own opinions on commentators in general and said in a recent feature in the latest edition of The Cricketer that "Cricket commentary must be one of the hardest jobs in the world. It is the only way I can make sense of how so many of them talk such absolute guff".

Pietersen was fined a reported £3000 for the tweet and, of course, it's not the first time Pietersen's been in trouble over his use of Twitter. In 2010, he announced he'd been dropped from the ODI squad having apparently forgotten how to use the direct messaging service. He was fined for his comments back then as well and this, arguably, was a far more worthy reason for him to be fined. Other English cricketers have got into trouble for their use of the site. Tim Bresnan was less than impressed with someone's creative use of Photoshop and the Yorkshire all-rounder Azeem Rafiq was banned after a Twitter rant. There are those, such as Graeme Swann, who use Twitter to entertain (and make fun of Steven Finn or Tim Bresnan). David Lloyd and Michael Vaughan, both former players (and in Bumble's case, coaches) turned commentators enjoy filling your timeline with those who 'abuse' them and their attempts to outwit/humiliate the perpetrator.

The relationship between the sports star and the media has become one of the player presenting a bland front and not really saying much. Cliches galore have slipped into speech, sometimes a sparkle in their eye suggests they want to get something off their chest, but they can't. Even the England Lions receive media training as part of their development. Presumably this'll now include a module on Twitter etiquette. However, Pietersen's not going to stop tweeting, nor will his opinion of Nick Knight change. There are those who will argue that if Knight's allowed to criticise Pietersen, how come Pietersen isn't allowed to criticise Knight? There are others who will say that Pietersen should be respectful and wonder what the reaction would be like if this was a team mate or member of staff. Mind you, we know what happens when he criticises a member of staff, don't we?

It's also not the first time that an England cricketer has singled Nick Knight out for criticism. During England's ODI series in India, in which Stuart Broad was sat at home eating crackers/what was really just a student diet and saying that this was really beneficial to his beanpole body, Broad tweeted this:

Maybe it was because it's Stuart Broad, someone who some don't think suffers from chronic foot-in-mouth syndrome. Maybe it's because it was said during the ODI series in India which everybody seems to have forgotten about. Perhaps I'm reading too much into it, but had this been said during a home series, would it have caused a similar reaction? With Pietersen causing headlines with seemingly every move/statement he makes, has he just become an easy target?

Twitter is a fantastic platform. In a way, it's like a massive press conference, only with more grammatical errors, overuse of exclamation marks and sometimes horses. With more and more cricketers signing up, opinions, spats, and the odd gaffe (Dale Steyn tweeting an "accidental cobra" in the background of a picture, for instance) are now a part of the game. And this will mean that it will continue to perplex and baffle the likes of Boycott and the technophobe Alastair Cook. But it will also continue to create debates and sometimes allows people to feel closer to the action, something which should be celebrated, and not scorned.

The Galle Test: Sri Lanka v England, Day 3

And so, to day 3 of the Galle Test, where England continue their phenomenally bad form against anyone who can spin a ball. Part of me imagines someone like Swann walking into the changing room and saying hello, only to find that the top order are cowered in a corner, desperately playing air sweep shots in an attempt to try and keep him away from them.

Enough about what goes on inside my head. Day 3 began with Sri Lanka at the crease and 5 wickets down already. They were looking to build on their 209 run lead and give England a target that would probably make them go into said corner and whimper without having faced a ball. England, meanwhile, were hoping to pick up the remaining 5 wickets quickly and chase down a total of around 250.
Here's what happened on an intriguing and close day 3 in Galle:

England v India: The Fourth Test, Day 2

After day one was rained off, I'm going to have another crack at live duck blogging the day's play. The weather looks set fair. Will the Indian bowlers fight back? How many runs will England get? Welcome back to day two from my living room carpet. 

India looks slightly more interested this morning, and Ishant Sharma, who was the pick of a bad bunch yesterday, picks up the wicket of Cook off the 5th ball of the morning.

Cook nicks a delivery outside off to Sehwag at first slip. Dravid is off the field. 

England are 75-1 and Ian Bell is the next man in. India begin the day with a couple of maidens.

England bring an end to the consecutive maidens and finally get off the mark.

Strauss gets a single into the leg side and he goes to 39.

Having done all the hard work and been restricted to only 2 singles, Strauss chases at a wider, fuller delivery from Sreesanth. 

'Tis a silly shot and Strauss is caught behind by Dhoni. Rod Ducker checks for a no-ball, but Sreesanth is fine.

So Strauss heads off for 40 off 106 deliveries, soon to be feeling the wrath of Bob Willis. England are 97-2 and India are finally having a decent session, about two Tests too late.

KP gets off the mark with a controlled edge for four along the ground and down to third man.

The four brings up England's 100.

Mishra finally gets a bowl over Raina. KP greets his first ball with a boundary and then in the next over, comes down the pitch and hits one uppishly on the leg side.

But it evades the fielder Gambhir and Sreesanth takes chase...

And Sreesanth does so unsuccessfully. It's another boundary to KP. 

After it's obvious that KP is going across his stumps, Raina comes in at the leg slip or region. And off the last ball before lunch, KP clips it round the corner to him.

Raina is not sure whether he's caught it and doesn't claim the catch.

The umpires go upstairs to check. Ian Bell makes sure he doesn't do a Trent Bridge and stays in his crease...

And the decision is not out. There's not enough conclusive evidence that Raina took the catch and KP, like at Lord's with a similar "dismissal", survives. England reach 126-2 at lunch. India have finally shown some fight as they restricted England and took the wickets of Cook and Strauss. It'll be an interesting afternoon session. 

England's 150 comes up as Sreesanth strays onto Ian Bell's pads.

It goes to Tenduckar in the deep...

Who manages to misfield and cannot stop the boundary.

Ian Bell gets closer to his 50 as he exquisitely drives Sreesanth through the covers...

For a four.

He then does exactly the same thing with the next delivery.

Which takes him to his 50. He raises the bat to The Oval crowd.

KP gets very far across his stumps to Sharma, again, and brings up his 50...

With a single to the fielder, Tenduckar.

He salutes his "home" crowd.

The 200 comes up with another single on the leg side.

KP is getting outside the line to Sharma to negate the LBW threat. But he's easily manoeuvring him around the field and brings up England's 200. 

Ian Bell creeps towards three figures in singles, until he finally gets one through the field...

And to the boundary for four. 

Bell reaches his fourth century of the summer and second of the series. He is in sparkling touch in 2011. The duckling hath finally become a duck. 

The partnership between him and KP is worth 199.

England go into tea at 296-2. 

KP brings up the two hundred partnership and also his century off the first ball after the tea break. 

It goes for four. 

And KP celebrates his second hundred of the series. 

But with the very next delivery, KP skies one...

He thinks he's a goner, as Gambhir is the man underneath it.

But Gambhir does not take the catch and ends up smacking the back of his head on the Oval turf. KP survives.

KP and Bell's partnership continues to grow and KP soon reaches his 150 with a four off Mishra.

He has overtaken Ian Bell and his 150 comes up off 208 deliveries.

But Bell soon follows Pietersen to 150. Both must be eyeing double centuries.

Bell gets a single off Sharma and salutes the appreciative crowd.

Bell piles on the misery for Mishra as he hits him for one six...

And then another.

KP smashes Raina for a four, but with the next ball smacks it straight back to him...

And Raina takes a good catch diving to his left.

KP goes for 175 off 232 and it is a fantastic innings. The previous delivery he'd brought up the 350 partnership between him and Bell. England are 447-3.

And Eoin Morgan decides that he doesn't want to face the terrifying Raina and sends in Jimmy as a nightwatchman, meaning Swanny will bat at 11. England finish the day with no more casualties and close on 457-3.