Another fine mess

Oh, how the ECB love to outdo themselves. Not content with how badly the Kevin Pietersen saga has panned out over the past fifteen months, they went and made it even worse. And this happened in a week where the sacking of a coach was leaked to the media before the man himself was even told. It's the sort of thing that you can't make up - and yet at the same time it doesn't feel surprising. The ECB, with their exceptional talent for angering the fans, have managed to exceed even themselves.

So, Andrew Strauss was appointed as the new director of cricket, filling the spot recently vacated by Paul Downton. What Downton lacked, Strauss certainly had - that understanding of the modern game, the gravitas and respect that comes with playing 100 test matches and being a highly successful captain of the side. Was it a 'safe' option? Maybe. It any case it looked like another man appearing from the establishment, still with close relationships to several of the key ECB figures, staff, and players. Whilst I would call myself a fan of Strauss, as the man who led England to the top of the rankings and the Ashes wins in 2009 and 2010/11, I might have preferred someone a bit more detached from the whole set up. But that's not saying he won't do a good job, and I don't doubt that he can be the man to take England forward. Though he's already made a horrible start, helping a messier situation to become even messier.

First of all came the sacking of Peter Moores, a move perhaps suggesting Strauss may not quite be the company man first believed and a man not afraid to make the big decision. It's easy to see why he went, and I would say the right call was made - progress made in the test side last summer being masked by dismal ODI performances, the defeat in the final test against the West Indies putting the cherry on top of it all. He certainly has a talent for spotting players, something we've seen in both reigns as coach - bringing Swann and Sidebottom back from the wilderness to become key players in his first reign; giving Ballance the number three spot and bringing Buttler into the test team during his second stint. And yet there's always been this sense that he just doesn't connect with the public - all the coach speak and talk of the 'data' that comes back to haunt him, and the complaints of his coaching style seem often to resurface, even if not going as far as Pietersen's description of him as a 'human triple espresso'.

But whether or not you felt it was the right choice, the way it happened was another unedifying episode for the ECB - Moores coaching the team in Ireland whilst the press is telling the world he doesn't have a job. It's just disrespectful, a terrible way to treat someone, and this to a man just a year ago described as the 'outstanding coach of his generation'. Once again the ECB are left embarrassed - they made the decision to bring Moores back and a year later have sacked him again. The Pietersen drama in the background gave it all an eerie sense of deja vu.

Indeed, ultimately it comes back to Kevin Pietersen, as it always seems to do. The man is told to go back, score runs in the County Championship, and then he might be able to get back in contention. And he certainly did that in emphatic fashion - 355* for Surrey with a strike rate close to 90, playing like the Pietersen of old. Innings like that are what makes him such a special player - a player that people want to watch, a player that can turn matches around and strike fear into the opposition. Innings like his 158 at The Oval in 2005, like the 186 at Mumbai in 2012, like those centuries in South Africa that announced him on the world stage. Can you really blame anyone for wanting to see a player like that?

Well, it turns out that the ECB can. On the very same day, Pietersen's England career was all but ended once again. He's not explicitly 'banned', but told he won't at least be featuring this summer, so as good as. The ECB outdo themselves again. I just feel that, if they don't want to select him - then just don't select him, rather than making an announcement about it, holding a meeting to say so. He's a fan favourite, and by making this announcement the ECB are essentially sticking their middle finger up to a lot of them. Neither side has come off well in the whole saga over the past year or so, Pietersen's book certainly not doing his image any favours, but the ECB seemed determined to come off worst of all. They've shot themselves in the foot, except they've done it so many times now that there's barely any foot left to shoot.

The contradictions make it even worse. Strauss speaks of a 'massive trust issue' between the ECB and Pietersen, and then offers him an advisory role for the ODI team. Does that really make any sense? It's unsurprising, at least, that Pietersen declined the role. And lurking in the shadows remains 'textgate', the whole affair that saw relations between the two sour in 2012, something clearly still lingering when Strauss was caught on the microphone describing Pietersen as 'an absolute c***' just last year. How much of this 'trust issue' is a personal one? And is Strauss, indeed, not detached far enough from the current set up?

Regardless of whether or not Pietersen should be in the team, the way this whole thing has been managed - and that is going back to the sacking last year and beyond - has been a disgrace. Is a player ever really unmanageable, or is it just bad management? And even in choosing to move on without him, surely it could have been done so much better? Instead there's been a black cloud hovering around English cricket for over a year, not always at the forefront, but always lingering somewhere. It will only continue.

Another new beginning

As seems to have been the norm with England in recent times, they find themselves starting another series with a lot to prove. Whilst the end of last summer found the test side in relatively good health - bouncing back well despite the horrors of the Ashes fallout and a stuttering start against Sri Lanka and India - a disastrous World Cup campaign has done a lot to undo that image, leaving England in disarray once again. And it's certainly a tough year ahead - a schedule challenging enough for a more established side, let alone one filled with players only starting to make their name in international cricket. The coming twelve months see series against New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, and Pakistan; first of all kicking things off with a tour of the West Indies.

On the face of it, a visit to the Caribbean might seem like a good place to start. A side weakened by battles with the board and absences to the IPL, West Indies don't appear to be the most challenging prospect at this time; certainly the view of new ECB head Colin Graves, describing them to be just 'mediocre' opposition. But even so, victory shouldn't be taken for granted - it was, after all, just their last visit that saw the infamous 51 all out and England unable to wrap up a single victory to avoid series defeat. And West Indies are the sort of side - much like England themselves - that can appear equally capable of springing an upset or pressing the self destruct button. England should be favourites to come away with a series win, but even so, their opposition should not be underestimated and England will always make you feel nervous.

There are still many questions about this England team that are yet to be answered, and the World Cup served to raise even more. A lot of them again seem to be revolving around the captain, Alastair Cook. He went a way to answering his critics at the back end of the summer, recovering to victory over India and getting some runs under his belt as well, but the struggles aren't over for him yet. A test century still eluded him, his highest score being 94 - six runs that mean so little, and yet make all the difference. And then he was sacked from the ODI captaincy - rightfully so, but a blow to his image and one he is still smarting from. The sacking may well, in a strange way, have saved him - lessening his association with a tragic tournament that could have ruined him - but he will still have a lot to prove. With big opposition coming up, England need a fully firing Alastair Cook, the one we know to be up there with the world's best batsmen and who leads by example. But if his struggles continue, his captaincy and even his place in the side will be questioned again. And he'll have an awful lot of left armers to face. 

The Kevin Pietersen drama has again reared its ugly head. I have swung between being drawn to the whole thing, lapping it up like a hungry gossip, and being tired of the constant fuss. The door has been opened for Pietersen to return - whether he will or not is another question, but there is a chance at least. Should he come back? Who knows. For me, the test team has moved on, and he'll be unlikely age-wise to play in the next ODI World Cup, but maybe with another World Twenty20 next year he could fit in for a final swansong. But - even though it means agreeing with Peter Moores - I find it a shame that the focus is still on a batsman who won't be featuring on the tour when there are a bunch of players breaking into the side, and who will be a much bigger presence in the team's future. The issue seems to be forever there, lingering and lurking and following England wherever they go.

There are still many spots to be filled in this side. Since the retirement of Andrew Strauss, nobody has really stepped up and made that second opening spot their own. I'm torn over who it should be - I would love to see Jonathan Trott back in the team but, and especially as a Yorkshire fan, I also think Adam Lyth has earned his chance and I want to see him have a go as well. Though Ballance had a troubled time in the World Cup, his performances last summer make it unlikely that Trott will return to that number three berth, but chances are Trott will be filling that spot at the top of the order. Bowling wise it will also be interesting to see the line up, with Moeen Ali being missing at the start of the tour and Woakes gone throughout due to injuries. It may mean Stokes returning to number six in the batting lineup, and I for one would love to see Adil Rashid playing as the spinner. It's great to see him back in the England set up, and I really hope it won't be just to carry the drinks. The last bowling spot will then be between Jordan, Plunkett and the new name in the squad, Mark Wood. Despite such poor showings at the World Cup, I would imagine Anderson and Broad will remain, though Broad in particular should be under a lot of pressure. The senior players need to step up too.

England should be a lot more comfortable returning to test matches, and hopefully this series will provide an immediate opportunity to put their World Cup woes behind them. Winning back the Ashes looks a tall, tall task from here, but it shouldn't be completely out of the question back on home soil. We're at the start of a crucial twelve months for English test cricket, and we'll see perhaps the first serious challenges for the new faces from the past year. It will be a chance to prove just how good they are, but it could well be a bumpy ride.

The saga rolls on and on

I got bored of the Kevin Pietersen 'saga' earlier in the year. Nothing was happening, just the odd annoying snipe coming from people on either side. Really, it was tedious. Really, some may still find it that way. But I've been a sucker for all the new drama as the gagging order has ended and the autobiography has been published, a sort of morbid fascination drawing me to the whole thing.

It's not hard to see why the book has been hitting the headlines, particularly with no English cricket to serve as a distraction. In short, the book is a bloodbath. The central attacks focus on the team's bullying culture, led by the keeper Matt Prior; and on the role of the coach, Andy Flower, described as a dictator. And it's not always difficult to believe. Watching the England team over the past few years, you can see the signs of such a bullying culture. Fielders have been chastised when they drop a catch, misfield, or are just seen as not putting in enough effort; often just written off as the bowlers being their typically grumpy selves. And there have been a number of players who have come into the team, only to find themselves out of it without perhaps a fair chance - Nick Compton one to spring to mind, the rumours being that his face simply didn't fit. Chris Tremlett has also spoken out in support of Pietersen's claims, while players from other countries have said it was something they picked up on. How much of Pietersen's words are truth and how much is exaggeration is impossible to know as just a fan, but it's enough to make you think about what you've seen and what really goes on behind closed doors.

Pietersen is far from innocent though in the whole affair. He's always been a brilliant, though frustrating, cricketer, and has played some of the best and most entertaining innings I've witnessed. The three centuries in the ODI series against South Africa in 2004/5 that announced him to the world; the 158 at The Oval in that Ashes series made his name; the invention of the switch-hit; and in the past couple of years centuries against Sri Lanka, South Africa, and India just giving more evidence of his match winning talents. But there's always been the ego to go alongside it, self-belief that is essential to play in the way he does, but that also rubs people up the wrong way and can be his downfall - going for the big shot when the match situation doesn't call for it, then using the old excuse 'it's just the way I play'. His ego is present in the book too; I think it has now just been hammered into my brain how he is England's leading run scorer of all time - I mean, it's true, but still. He just doesn't always endear himself. And this is ignoring the various scandals that have plagued the last years of his career - from losing the captaincy, to textgate, to whatever really happened in Australia. I doubt we'll ever know the full story about any of these, and though the ECB are at fault too, there must have been some sort of issue for them all to explode in the way they did. 

The overwhelming feeling I get from the book is one of sadness. England had a truly brilliant player on their hands, but neither the ECB or Pietersen could work together to achieve what they might have done. Everyone failed in Australia and several international careers ended on a sour note, players who should have been celebrated for their achievements - England rose to number one in the world, won three Ashes series and their first in Australia for 24 years, their first series win in India for 27 years. And Pietersen was a part of it. But now he may be remembered just as much for the fall outs and the in-fights as he is for the cricket, the great innings he has played, and the great wins he has been a part of. 

I don't want to defend the ECB, I have absolutely no desire of that. There's a lot of food for thought for them - how can they let their relationship with a star player get to such a stage where a book like this is even written and published? If there was such a culture of bullying, why was this not fully investigated? How was Flower coaching and was he having an adverse effect, as Pietersen has said? And really, what did go so wrong in Australia? But instead the ECB always seem intent on covering their tracks, the latest being a 'dossier' (however legitimate or not it was, and whatever purpose it was intended for) covering Pietersen's misdemeanors in Australia, including checking his watch and looking out his window. There were parts of the dossier showing Pietersen shouting and swearing at his teammates, but the petty things are what attracts the attention, adding to the belief of the ECB's conspiracy against Pietersen. Simply, the ECB's relationship with the fans is broken, and this feeling is repeating time and time again. I don't think either side has come out of this well, but I feel that Pietersen has won the PR war - it's definitely much easier to sympathise with him and feel his career's been taken away from him. Just as much though, it's felt like a case of airing dirty laundry in public. 

That said, it's been a entertaining distraction while the cricket's been off. 

English cricket's problem with its fans

It's been a struggle being a follower of English cricket over the past year. Not just because of what's happened on the pitch either, in fact quite often it's been because of events off the pitch. English cricket, and moreover, the ECB, has not always had the easiest relationship with its fans but it could be glossed over while the team did well. But more often than not in recent times as the team has struggled on the pitch, what's gone on off it has served to distract further – multiple sagas involving Kevin Pietersen, debates over England's supposed cricketing 'philosophy', and now the responses and debates over Cook as captain.

I don't want to weigh in on whether Pietersen should be playing for England – quite frankly, I'm bored of the whole issue and to me what's done is done – we're not going to see him in the side again. But questions must be asked over the ECB's – and specifically the new managing director Paul Downton's – handling of the whole issue. It's obviously an emotive issue for those involved in the game – he was one of England's biggest stars for nearly ten years, certainly the one who attracted the most attention from the media, and played a style of cricket that people loved to see. Though he was frustrating in equal measure and his ego did often get in the way, ditching him was always going to provoke a reaction. Whether or not it was the right decision to make though, the way it has unfolded has been a shambles. Rather than drawing a line under the issue and moving on, we've been treated to dribbles of information coming from either sides (Pietersen far from innocent as well with his comments – subtle and unsubtle – on the issue) – Downton saying one thing, Pietersen refuting it, even at one stage bizarre kind of proxy-war between Matt Prior and Piers Morgan. It's just not the sort of thing you want coming from a national board, and it's not done it any favours with the supporters, many disappointed that Pietersen is gone in the first place. I just find the whole thing tiresome.

It's not just been the Pietersen saga either. The style of play hasn't been inspiring, even at those points when England have been winning – against New Zealand and the home Ashes series. It was far from exciting cricket, the run rate coming at points to a standstill and grinding out the results. It can be odd criticising a team when they're winning, but to many England became unlikeable both in the style of play and in their attitude. It just became worse when the winter came and the results disappeared. When Moores took over he made a point of saying England would adopt a more positive philosophy, an indication that the criticism was being listened to. Was it in evidence in the Sri Lankan series? Well at times, yes, but at times no. The captaincy was a part of it, questions continuing over Cook's position. It would be unfair to judge the new side on just one series, which in any case was thoroughly enjoyable as both games went down to the final over. But if England are to start playing attractive cricket, they'll be wanting fewer days like day four where they gave no answer to Sri Lanka's dominance, losing all sense of attack.

And on to Cook, though I don't want to be going on and on over whether or not he should be captain. It's just that he's not doing himself any favours, and nor are the ECB. Giles Clarke's comments about Cook and his family being right to lead England, and Downton's unquestioning support – especially given where he stands on Pietersen – just haven't sat well as more and more the leader on the field has come under fire. Cook's response hasn't come off well either – saying 'something needs to be done' in relation to Warne's comments. Now, I do find Warne's comments repetitive, excessive and rather annoying, but it's just not really how an international captain should be responding to criticism. It would be much better to see his response on the pitch, or else it's just going to continue. When it came to the end of the match, England agonisingly being defeated on the penultimate ball, Anderson was in tears, while with Cook once more it seemed like a bit too much media speak and not enough soul.

Really, I just want to see my team doing well again at the game I love, I want to see them enjoying their cricket, I want to see signs of progress rather than having to sigh from disappointment whenever I watch them. I'm still going to stay optimistic over their future because there are reasons to look up even with their most recent defeat – they came so close to saving the match after one of the great innings from Mathews and a top order collapse that really left them with too much to do; you can't really blame Anderson because really he shouldn't have been in that position. But I do think that English cricket does have to work on its relationship with its fans, because, after all, they are the ones spending money and their emotion on the team.