When I seen this story I kind of knew it was going to make a few headlines and lead to differing interpretations depending on how the person reporting it felt personally about Kevin Pietersen. Nearly two years on, I don’t think Kevin Pietersen really needed to reopen the Peter Moores saga again.
Not surprisingley the headlines are having a swipe at Pietersen, ‘We won the Ashes because of me, by KP’ is the sort of thing currently being reported by the likes of Cricinfo, The Daily Telegraph, Independent, etc.
As is usually the case, when you actually read the story you can form an opinion of your own that is not influenced by the headline. And, as is usually the case, as it is in this instance, you find that the headline dosen’t really give a true representation of the actual story.
Pietersen is certainly arrogant and full of self belief and self importance, and that comes through clearly in the article. Thats not a criticism of him by the way.
I don’t mind that side of Pietersen though, yes it’s a pain in the arse when he gets out on 99 attempting to slog the opposing spinner for 6, but it’s the self belief that gets him to 99 in the first place – and after all, it’s his own batting record that he’s tarnishing.
When Pietersen is asked a question he generally gives an answer. People might not like it, but it’s better than the usual straight batted, media savy answers we get from most cricketers these days.
When he gives an opinion the media can really go to town on it, as I think they have done in this case. He is clearly happy to take some of the credit for retaining the Ashes, and rightly so as he played his part.
But if people read the article in full he is clearly stating that the success is mainly down to Andrew Strauss and Andy Flower. I’m not totally sure, but he may even be saying that England couldn’t have done this under his own captaincy.
Where I think he lets himself down, is having a swipe at Peter Moores and saying that England couldn’t have won the Ashes under his leadership. There is no real need for that. Depending on how you want to interpret things, it could be said that Moores played his part in the success by bringing in Andy Flower.
I’d also like to think that his line “I got rid of the captaincy for the good of English cricket” wasn’t meant in the context that it comes across in, as that would imply it was all part of a big plan, which it clearly wasn’t. I hope this is just a case of Pietersen getting his words a bit tangled.
Pietersen has opened his (some might say, big) mouth again, but if anything his biggest crime is against himself as he is giving the elements of the press that hate him the chance to put the boot into him. All in all though, I think it’s just a bit of a fuss about nothing.