England squad delayed after KP texts

Brass Monkey wrote:SA. I'm thinking of 98 and 2003.

It is always possible but I think this team is far stronger both mentally and in playing ability.

I think they are too. I also think England are a better side than at either of those times and are capable of making SA have a flutter.

PeterCS wrote:Is it too late to recall Tres and Thorpey?

(And Bicknell ....)

OK, let's go with...

Atherton
Trescothick
Butcher
Thorpe
Stewart
Flintoff
Russell
Gough
Bicknell
Hoggard
Malcolm

Umpires: Mervyn Kitchen and Javed Akhtar

No South African side in a decisive Test could possibly stand a chance against that!

taipan wrote:

Henry wrote:BTW taips, apologies. I genuinely thought you were Red because of your avatar. Didn't even bother to look at the name. Didn't mean any offence by calling you Red!

indeed, the eye is hardly drawn to the name below the avatar

So, where are we then with Kevgate?

Firstly, KP is a complete loon for surrounding himself with "people" who know fluck all about cricket. He has been horrendously advised and deserves criticism for even contemplating going with it.

Then there's Piers Morgan - has a bigger tw@t ever stalked the planet?

Now we turn to England's "management" - the word has to be put into inverted commas, because there's been precious little management going on. How would they have dealt with "difficult" characters like, Hussain, Gough, Caddick, Edmonds, Boycott and Snow to name but a few?

KP has farked up spectacularly, but we are a seriously poorer side for his absence - certainly in test cricket ( oh and can we have a gagging order on Brezzie Lad for talking unutterable bollocks about Bairstow please?)

Lock the players in a room after this test and don't let them out until something is sorted out.

This is a farking shambles of the first order.

Basil wrote:So, where are we then with Kevgate?

Firstly, KP is a complete loon for surrounding himself with "people" who know fluck all about cricket. He has been horrendously advised and deserves criticism for even contemplating going with it.

Then there's Piers Morgan - has a bigger tw@t ever stalked the planet?

Now we turn to England's "management" - the word has to be put into inverted commas, because there's been precious little management going on. How would they have dealt with "difficult" characters like, Hussain, Gough, Caddick, Edmonds, Boycott and Snow to name but a few?

KP has farked up spectacularly, but we are a seriously poorer side for his absence - certainly in test cricket ( oh and can we have a gagging order on Brezzie Lad for talking unutterable bollocks about Bairstow please?)

Lock the players in a room after this test and don't let them out until something is sorted out.

This is a farking shambles of the first order.

If a down to Earth, sensible guy like Strauss is clearly struggling to control his anger at a press conference when asked about Pietersen, then I think outsiders like us should assume that it was the right decision to drop him. Flower and Strauss have got it right more often than not over the last three years. Yes, we all enjoy Pietersen's batting, but there is a limit, and a line as to what is acceptable, and what isn't, in a team environment.

Mr conservative, captain negs, master of the straight bat Strauss described a dressing room with Pietersen in it at the moment as "untenable".

Of course, the ECB isn't completely innocent. They have quietly been a shambles since the Alan Stanford debacle back in 2009, and their incompetence has only been hidden by an England team that is successful England team on the field. But IMO, regardless of what they have and haven't done in recent times, the decision to leave out Pietersen for this match was the correct one, and was a decision that was made in consultation with two of the shrewdest minds English cricket has ever had- Flower and Strauss, so that's good enough for me.

I thought to myself, where's Bell on this subject? Where's Cook? Distinctly remember KP defending them both, looking a bit of a pork chop doing so, when they were all different brands of ultrawank.

Credit to Bell and Cook for not saying anything, they're about the only ones who haven't! A few others could have followed their example.

Should be a few interesting comments in the Sky box.

I doubt it. Athers and co will be all "well, enough's been said already, let's just concentrate on what should be a great test match...."

And I agree. I'm tired of this whole situation with KP. Although of course Beefy will side with KP. Anything that's anti-establishment floats his boat big time.

Basil wrote:So, where are we then with Kevgate?

Firstly, KP is a complete loon for surrounding himself with "people" who know fluck all about cricket. He has been horrendously advised and deserves criticism for even contemplating going with it.

Then there's Piers Morgan - has a bigger tw@t ever stalked the planet?

Now we turn to England's "management" - the word has to be put into inverted commas, because there's been precious little management going on. How would they have dealt with "difficult" characters like, Hussain, Gough, Caddick, Edmonds, Boycott and Snow to name but a few?

KP has farked up spectacularly, but we are a seriously poorer side for his absence - certainly in test cricket ( oh and can we have a gagging order on Brezzie Lad for talking unutterable bollocks about Bairstow please?)

Lock the players in a room after this test and don't let them out until something is sorted out.

This is a farking shambles of the first order.

Bang on!

Although as much as Piers is an @rse of the highest order, he has vocally pointed out the hypocrisy at points of this, although doubt it helped KP much.

Brass Monkey wrote:I thought to myself, where's Bell on this subject? Where's Cook? Distinctly remember KP defending them both, looking a bit of a pork chop doing so, when they were all different brands of ultrawank.

Interesting isn't it? I also remember KP backing Strauss not long ago!

Seems Bell and Cook now on form think best to not repay the favour or face the consequences of the school yard bullies!

Top post by Baz.

Aye, Chas, true. He said they were all behind Strauss and that he wasn't far away from some form.

holcs:

Or you could say, backing someone when he's out of form is one thing, supporting someone when he's been behaving a bit like a headless prick is a bit different.

Suggestion today that he used a four-letter Afrikaans word to describe Strauss and also offered tactical advice to Steyn about how to get him out... the prospects of him returning to the side are looking more remote the more we hear it seems.

Doos probably

beamer wrote:Suggestion today that he used a four-letter Afrikaans word to describe Strauss and also offered tactical advice to Steyn about how to get him out... the prospects of him returning to the side are looking more remote the more we hear it seems.

If it's true that he aided and abetted a member of the opposition against one of his own players - there should be no question of a comeback - ever.

Called someone a 4 letter word is one thing. The tactics as you say are another!

Ouch. Doesn't look good for a quick return!

It's all hearsay and TBH I don't think SA needed much advice on how to get Strauss out.

Definitely not. I said that myself the other day.

taipan wrote:It's all hearsay and TBH I don't think SA needed much advice on how to get Strauss out.

Whether or not SA knew how to bowl to Strauss (and they probably do) is irrelevant - if it is proven that the substance of any of the text messages was advice as to how to bowl at him - KP is history.

Basil wrote:

taipan wrote:It's all hearsay and TBH I don't think SA needed much advice on how to get Strauss out.

Whether or not SA knew how to bowl to Strauss (and they probably do) is irrelevant - if it is proven that the substance of any of the text messages was advice as to how to bowl at him - KP is history.

I doubt if even KP is that stupid. What exact secrets could he suuply?

Was something like suggesting bowling round the wicket I believe.

beamer wrote:Was something like suggesting bowling round the wicket I believe.

Basic shit then. IIRC Morkel was coming round in the 1st test.