Kevin Pietersen deserves better - An open letter to ECB

Dear ECB,

England was thoroughly humiliated in the Oz tour. Point taken. The team needed a revamp. Point taken. But, how on earth do you rebuild a side by telling your best player that his services are no longer required even as he’s mentally and physically upbeat.

At the end of the day, it all comes down to statistics. A batsman’s place in the team is determined by the number of runs scored by him. Kevin Pietersen was the highest run-scorer (294 runs @ 29) for England in the return Ashes series.

Surely, that isn’t impressive, but that is the best you have. And this is how you reward him? Dropping him for a series or two while he regains his touch would have made some sense, but permanent axing is too rigid, unreasonable and uncalled for.

Your new managing director, Paul Downtown claims that ECB has been compelled to make this decision to sack KP because the team needs long-term planning after the disaster down under. Bafflingly so, he didn’t reveal any development players who are to replace the outgoing legend. Moreover, with just one year to go for the World Cup, how can you expect a new player to come into the side and notch up the requisite experience?

Moreover, no explanation has been provided as to why this sacking became compulsive. If the ‘Long-term planning’ theory is anything to go by, Pietersen, in his early-30s, is considered incapable of surviving 3-4 years of international cricket. However, a rule must be uniformly applicable to all members of a squad. Why the likes of Ian Bell (31), James Anderson (31), Jonathan Trott (32), Matt Prior (31) weren’t sacked? Pietersen is being made the scapegoat for a debacle everyone was equally responsible for!

The statement issued, as Ian Botham says, is “full of corporate waffle.” It contained everything we knew beforehand, but nothing that we wanted to know. Disposing such an invaluable player makes for no defence anyhow. Even the man who matters, Pietersen, himself has no idea of the specific reason of his axing.

The last part of the statement issued by the board stresses upon developing ‘team ethic and philosophy.’ Does ECB wish to fill the dressing room with a bunch of yes-men? It is a known fact that Pietersen questions the given. He’s not one among the crowd. Apparently, that is what makes him the remarkably accomplished cricketer that he is!

Kevin Pietersen needs managing, given his attitude and overly publicised, disruptive nature in the decision-making affairs. The team management has found the easy way out rather, by showing him the boot. If they can’t manage players, what are they paid for?

As per Michael Vaughan, the former English skipper, Pietersen was the easiest to manage because of his straightforwardness. You say a couple of nice things to him and his egos are satisfied. More essentially, he needs to be at comfort, mentally. He is indeed, an egotistic person. But, all you have to do is make him feel important. When done so, he will reap dividends for you. Couldn’t you find a managing team which could do such a simple job?

Importantly enough, how are you going to find a replacement for Pietersen? In a country where players with natural flair are in short supply, such a decision is nothing short of ridiculous and perhaps, regrettable. Hardly will there ever be a player who can pile up runs at an astounding average of 234 in his first 6 games. The selection panel will fish all year long, may be even forever, but would never discover a gem anywhere close to Pietersen.

After all, a team plays to win. And to win a game of cricket you need your best players to be out there in the middle. Come on, ECB, this is a simple fact. Pietersen is the very best you’ve got – a cut above every other English batsman, by miles. It makes no sense whatsoever to dump a class act, with over thirteen thousand runs to his name at the highest level.

The board rather, it seems, would prefer a match-winner, resembling the cricketing faculties of Kevin Pietersen, but who is disciplined and submissive. Well, if that is so, then, you are living in a fool’s paradise. Harsha Bhogle puts it well, that the two qualities of match-winning and conformism haven’t ever existed in the same cricketer. Had Shane Warne been dealt like this after all the controversies that he was a party to, Australia would never have been the dominant force they went on to be given the lack of good spinning options.

Instead of cashing on into his experience, you have asked him to hang up his boots. As part of the restructuring, you could have provided a greater role for him in the team. You need his style and approach to the game. Hence, he should have been given the freedom and space to get things done the way he wanted them to.

ECB, being a part of the so called ‘Big Three’ supposedly knows ‘What’s good for business.’ Is showing the door to one of the most entertaining batters in world cricket good for business? Why would the English spectators pay to watch a ‘rebuilding’ English side rid of its greatest asset? The fans haven’t been considered important enough to know the sequence of events which led to his axing. Why shouldn’t the fans return the favour? It is disgusting to note your disregard for the fans – the ones you are indebted to for being the power you are!

Pietersen has been a great ambassador for English cricket for nine years now – having wielded his blade to earn memorable victories for English Cricket in varying conditions. He possessed the rare talent of controlled flamboyance – something that can’t be compensated for once he’s gone. He didn’t deserve such an unceremonious end to what has been a scintillating career. He had much to offer only if he was allowed to!

You are expected to make an apology to not just Pietersen himself, but also the English fans for your being deliberately ignorant. More so, better relook at the horrendous decision that you have made. Pietersen in English colours for another 5 years will do English cricket more good than not!

Yours faithfully,

A Pietersen fan