Tired Pietersen warns of burnout

Kevin Pietersen once more raised the thorny subject of player burnout as he appealed to the England board to do something about the almost non-stop schedule imposed on the team.

England have hardly had a break since late 2005 - their last meaningful rest came after the Ashes series that summer, although some players such as Pietersen and Andrew Flintoff had to take part in the ICC's Super Series in what was a six-week lay-off. The last two winter tours have ended after the English season has started, so the England players have returned and gone straight into the home season without any time off.

"When I said I was tired in the summer nobody said anything to me, nobody backed me at all," Pietersen shrugged. "It would be nice to have the decision taken out of my hands.

"It's always a very tricky question. I would find it very hard to miss a tour because I love playing cricket. When I broke a rib in the winter and had to go home, I got really frustrated watching the one-day games on television because I wanted to be out in Australia playing.

"I want to play for another nine or ten years and the schedule we have got is tricky. I have not missed a Test match since I made my debut. I am not sure about missing whole tours, but I do believe there is scope for certain players to be looked after and certain players need to be looked after."

Hugh Morris, in Sri Lanka less than a fortnight after being appointed as managing director of English cricket, offered some hope to Pietersen and his colleagues.

"Resting players is on the table, for sure," he said. "I want to discuss it with the management team and the players. There is a serious amount of international cricket being played and we need to ensure that our best players are fit and raring to go. But we have to balance the need to play the right amount of cricket with commercial considerations."

He a Safster. Born sooky-sooky-laer.

HH_pink wrote:He a Safster. Born sooky-sooky-laer.

I don't think it's a sook - it just a statement of fact. England's schedule for the past couple of years has been ridiculous.

It's the bowlers who are feeling it the most - England have had to develop an entirely new bowling attack since 2005 as guys who should be entering their peak years in their late-twenties are instead spending them on the treatement table.

Giles and Jones are finished. Flintoff's all but done. Harmison has been in and out with back and side problems. Hoggard hasn't completed a Test match this year.

International cricket will soon be like the treadmill that is county cricket - no fast bowlers because with little recovery time between games, their bodies won't be able to handle the workload. It'll just be a long list of injuries and all manner of medium pacers.

Who said it wasn't a batsman's game?

But the reality is that it is only going to get 'worse' because of other overriding concerns for the administrators of world sports. So it is up to the players to either find a way to raise their fitness levels and get in there or chicken out sooking. A rotation policy would/should suit both parties fine though.

HH_pink wrote:But the reality is that it is only going to get 'worse' because of other overriding concerns for the administrators of world sports. So it is up to the players to either find a way to raise their fitness levels and get in there or chicken out sooking. A rotation policy would/should suit both parties fine though.

Rotation only works if you've got 15 or 16 top class players. The punters want to see the stars play so how pissed will they having bought tickets to find Flintoff or Pietersen being rested and some tosspot like Mahmood or Sales in their place? Again, you can't rotate unless you're consistently winning or you risk defeat. Look at Oz in NZ earlier this year when they rested Punter.

He's got soft since he became a pom

HH_pink wrote:But the reality is that it is only going to get 'worse' because of other overriding concerns for the administrators of world sports. So it is up to the players to either find a way to raise their fitness levels and get in there or chicken out sooking. A rotation policy would/should suit both parties fine though.

What a load of bollocks.

How exactly does one "raise their fitness level" if they've got a stress fracture of the back as a result of constant playing with little to no recovery time in between?

TBH, JAMODIs shouldn't really ever contain the same personnel for an entire series. It's the giggly younger brother of Test Cricket - a sideshow clowning. If the likes of KP need a rest, don't make them play any more than 2 ODIs in a 5-matcher.

"But we have to balance the need to play the right amount of cricket with commercial considerations."

An odd statement from Hughie Morris.
By that is he trying to appease the sponsors ... or appease the England team?

Too much cricket. The cash cow is being milked dry and it's the quality of cricket that is suffering. We will never see another Ambrose, Waqar or Donald if we don't give players a chance for rest and repair.

S F Barnes wrote:Too much cricket. The cash cow is being milked dry and it's the quality of cricket that is suffering. We will never see another Ambrose, Waqar or Donald if we don't give players a chance for rest and repair.

Yep, with more rest and repair, Saj would have been a Waqar . . . I think that's how you spell it?

England's schedule for the past couple of years has been ridiculous.

And stats support you. Eng have played for the most no. of days since the begininning of '06 of all test playing nations, with India closely behind them. Considering the amount of cricket (2 ODIs of this ODI series, 3 tests and 5 ODIs against Pak, 4 tests and atleast 8 ODIs against Aussies and SL and then an Asia cup at home) India has to play in next few months its safe to assume that they'll overtake Eng in coming few months.

Tests and ODIs played by test playing nations since Jan-06

England
Tests: 22; ODIs: 53; No. of playing days: 141

India
Tests: 18; ODIs: 59; No. of playing days: 131

Sri Lanka
Tests: 14; ODIs: 60; No. of playing days: 116

South Africa
Tests: 17; ODIs: 46; No. of playing days: 114

West Indies
Tests: 14; ODIs: 52; No. of playing days: 108

Australia
Tests: 11; ODIs: 58; No. of playing days: 102

Pakistan
Tests: 17; ODIs: 34; No. of playing days: 102

New Zealand
Tests: 8; ODIs: 34; No. of playing days: 66

Note: Assuming each test is atleast 4-days long and ODI is of course a day long.

Dello wrote:

HH_pink wrote:He a Safster. Born sooky-sooky-laer.

I don't think it's a sook - it just a statement of fact. England's schedule for the past couple of years has been ridiculous.

It's the bowlers who are feeling it the most - England have had to develop an entirely new bowling attack since 2005 as guys who should be entering their peak years in their late-twenties are instead spending them on the treatement table.

Giles and Jones are finished. Flintoff's all but done. Harmison has been in and out with back and side problems. Hoggard hasn't completed a Test match this year.

International cricket will soon be like the treadmill that is county cricket - no fast bowlers because with little recovery time between games, their bodies won't be able to handle the workload. It'll just be a long list of injuries and all manner of medium pacers.

Who said it wasn't a batsman's game?

I'd accept every word of that if it weren't for the fact that these players hardly take part in county cricket anymore?

Well, I'm initially inclined to pick up on JKL's point that they don't play as much county cricket any more, if any. It's the old stat that Beefy bowled more in one season that all of our pace attack put together. For some bowlers loads of overs is the key. Some aren't that way. I think the aspect of all the travel is actually a largeish part of the problem, nipping here and there etc. But again, tours used to be longer - so I'm not sure if that's better or worse. Overall, maybe the 'stars of yesteryear' didn't complain as much or simply didn't have as much of a soundbite friendly load of hacks hanging on their every word.

It's not like Pietersen is having a whinge after England has crashed to a series loss. Englands schedule has been pretty much non stop since the 2005 Ashes, whereas teams like Australia and India have had extended breaks during the same period.

Henry wrote:It's not like Pietersen is having a whinge after England has crashed to a series loss. Englands schedule has been pretty much non stop since the 2005 Ashes, whereas teams like Australia and India have had extended breaks during the same period.

Yeah Trev, but both of those teams are gay as f**k whingy little sh!ts with a bad attitude. Quite a disgrace to the human race, but then they love cricket - so are tolerated.

Henry wrote:It's not like Pietersen is having a whinge after England has crashed to a series loss. Englands schedule has been pretty much non stop since the 2005 Ashes, whereas teams like Australia and India have had extended breaks during the same period.

Can't you make one post without bringing Australia into it.

Not when the facts require me to bring them up, no. What were they doing between the world cup and the T20 world cup?

tac wrote:Can't you make one post without bringing Australia into it.

Why should he? They've had such a massive lay-off it's unbelievable.

Just because they had a 'gruelling' time, getting pounded in ‘Turkish baths’, is their prerogative. Don’t try and call that cricket, because it’s just not.

Henry wrote:Not when the facts require me to bring them up, no. What were they doing between the world cup and the T20 world cup?

And look at Australia's schedule for the next 18 months. Not each team's schedule coincide.
How does discussing England's schedule "require" that you bring up Australia's schedule? Yes, England have had a tough schedule, what does Australia's schedule have to do with that?

Err, to give a comparison between the 2 teams schedules over the period that Pietersen was talking about? I did mention India as well, but obviously your blinkers are well and truly fastened. This is a thread about what Pietersen said after all, is it not?

*This is an interval post whilst tac tries to come up with an insulting comeback....soothing elevator music...Hows your day been sir?......Excellent.....etc*

Have India had a big break recently? Can't remember..

Henry wrote:Err, to give a comparison between the 2 teams schedules over the period that Pietersen was talking about? I did mention India as well, but obviously your blinkers are well and truly fastened. This is a thread about what Pietersen said after all, is it not?

If only every other post was about Australia, that argument might just be believable. But, you have "form" Trev . . .

Have India had a big break recently? Can't remember.

That was more of a self inflicted break for India due to them being knocked out of first round of WC'07. But I don't think that was a big break.

We've been playing virtually non stop since Bangla tour in Apr and would continue to do so till Australia's tour ends in Feb. Even after that I think we've an Asia Cup at home to take part in.