Pietersen will bring a new style of leadership

I am concerned that we have promoted from within just to ensure we have the same captain in all forms of the game. Nothing against KP but centrally contracted players don't get chance to captain their county and therefore do gain any experience. I would have gone for Rob Key who apparently has not only proved himself an excellent captain but has apparently improved tremendously as a player since his last international appearance. I wish KP all the best, he's going to need it.

Aggers- that looks a bit generous to Moores, surely? His honeymoon ended with series lost to India and Sri Lanka in 2007. Another beating in India and he might not make the Caribbean, never mind the Ashes.

I'm all for forward planning, giving coach, captain and players 10-12 games to prove themselves. But constantly referring everything to the last or next Ashes is daft- there are six other teams to play in between, at least three of which are clearly better than England over the last two or three years.

Wasn't Henry V thought of as a playboy until his leadership was tested in battle. "Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more; Or close the wall up with our English dead"

Maybe we should make the 12th man the captain from now on - then at least we won't be stuck with this problem of either ruining a good players performance through pressure or having to play someone out of form just because they are captain. Non playing captains are the future!

I am convinced Pietersen will be a great captain because he brings the best out of himself in pressure situations and I'm sure he will be able to bring the best out of his players in similar situations. His self-confidence and belief will breathe new life in an England dressing room that has become afraid of success against big teams.

Much has been written about the manner of his dismissal in the 2nd innings of the previous test but the truth of the matter was he still scored more runs on his own than Strauss, Cook, Vaughan, Bell, Flintoff and Ambrose combined in that innings. And if he had hit him for 6 then we would all be heaping praise on the perfect way to achieve another magnificent hundred. Nobody seemed to criticise Collingwood's shot selection at excatly the same stage of his innings, although he did execute it better!

I agreed with Muralis and am not too sure what Peter Moores has done to avoid the flak, whilst Vaughan has been hounded out by the media.

Moores took over a team that, one defeat against Australia apart, had beaten just about everyone else under Duncan Fletcher. Since he has taken over, we have beaten only the Windies and New Zealand, whilst losing to India, Sri Lanka and South Africa.

If it is true that he doesn't see eye to eye with the new captain and other senior players, I would question the wisdom of retaining his services.

Like Moores, Pietersen will really have to prove himself to the selectors, the fans and indeed the world.

If England continue to play the way they have been so far in this series in the run-up to The Ashes then this appointment will have been a waste of time, and we shall surely see the end of Moores' tenure fairly soon.

However, if KP can fully command the respect of the other ten players in the side (I'd imagine he will be able to), then perhaps we may see an overhaul in the way England have been playing, hopefully both in the constant batting collapses in test (though I'm not sure how much the captain can really do about this at number 4) and the poor run rates and various other problems that have hurt England in one-day games.

One thing is certain. Change is needed.

Aghhhh. No way of accomodating Strauss in the one-day setup. I can't believe they've insisted on this "one captain" policy and in doing so rejected choosing Strauss who has already shown his mettle as a test captain by winning a series against Pakistan 2-0.
Test cricket and one-day cricket are completely different animals, can't they see that? Test cricket captaincy demands guile and subtlety. Has anyone noticed either of those qualities in Pietersen? Ever? And in his own words, he has "zilch" experience of captaincy! I'm finding this all very frustrating.

I worry for the future when selectors seem to listen to the whims of marketing men to influence their choices.

I am not a great KP fan, but I wish him luck. I am not sure if it is the right decision, but, as you say, a change in attitude is a good thing. And the English team certainly needs it.

Many test matches these days end within four days. With the more aggressive and positive attitude that will undoubtedly come to the team, at least in the short term, I can't see many even lasting that long. There is no doubt that test cricket is moving towards the one day form of the game and this appointment will only hasten the change. I hope it will serve to strengthen the long form against twenty20 and preserve it.

Overall a positive move and one I support (even though, as I said, I am not entirely sure it is the right decision).

Aggers, You seem to be towing the standard line that Vaughan was a great captain, and real 'thinker'.. but on what basis is this made?
I can only the move to make KP captain as a positive, if only to shift the focus of the England team into playing to win, rather than seemly starting out beaten, as we have seen all to many times recently.
Vaughan is far from the exceptional captain he's been made out; the ashes aside (and you can argue that the series was an almighty fluke, regardless of captain), Vaughan has been shown up by all but the might of West Indies, New Zealand, and Bangladesh. How does this make him someone we'll miss?
An evaluation of the few wins he has notched up as captain against the 'better' sides in World cricket (notibly SA in 03/04) the tests won were despite him (he scored no better than the current series).
He has proved nothing more than mediocre as a captain, and while he showed superb form with the bat a few years ago, if England are to progress, this is the best thing that could ever have happened..

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

1. Most top class players can adapt to Test and ODI's otherwise they aren't top.

2 The top rated International teams have 2 or 3 players with the maturity and experience to take over the captaincy - .e.g Australia and SA and India.

3 English counties invite overseas players to captain their sides! The 3 countries mentioned wouldn't dream of doing that. So EQP's (England Qualified Players) have limited opportunities to gain captaincy experience and especially when they are centrally contracted.

4 Until the ECB and counties really develop English players from the grass roots and spend the huge amount of money available in nurturing home-grown talent we will remain short of proven candidates for senior jobs.

5.I suggest that Cook is an example of a player who HAS been nurtured properly since his considerable talent was identified. There should be more like him with leadership potential. The population of this country dwarfs Australia, SA, NZ,Sri Lanka, West Indies!!

Conclusion: Until we learn to produce a stream of top class young EQP's we will have no real choice for captaincy and teams that lack balance.

Does anyone know why the selectors had to make a decision in such a rush anyway?

Strauss could esaily have taken over for the Oval test. KP would have been standing in for Collingwood for the next 3 ODI games anyway so could have finshed the series.

They could then have taken a considered and informed decision at the same time as selecting the touring teams for the winter.

The selectors look like they are as much "rabiits in the headlights" as the players have been recently.

The only happy people will be the marketing team who will think they can sell a lot more shirts.

I hope KP grows into the role and proves my doubts to be ill-founded.

Like many of the other comments already posted, I am not sure it is the right decision but now that it has been made I wish KP every success and I am sure that he will do much better than MPV has done since returning from his knee injury a mere shadow of the captain that lead England 2003-2005.
Peter Moores job does indeed ride on the success of our new captain , and perhaps the other selectors too. Many thought Moores a poor choice as coach, and the awful results against the highest ranked nations show that he is worse than Duncan Fletcher as coach, well now he has a chance to turn around his poor start if KP can work well with him.
Bottom line is , that one week ago I expected England to lose the 3rd and 4th tests, today I am ready to bet money on England winning the 4th Test, because there is nobody in the world more eager to beat SA , leading from the front by example or more capable of inspiring the players with his lets kick their butts desire. I really think we are going to win at the Oval, and its a great feeling..........

One of the many things that have impressed me about SA is their discipline and demeanour as they go about their business.When an England player gets a century the celebrations are as if they ve just beaten Don Bradmans's records.More substance less "style" and better results are what is needed.And then we go and appoint Pieterson as captain........ Can we start by having a proper wicket keeper like Chris Read.He may not have attitude and be a relentless sledger but he can catch the ball!

It is a truly sorry state of affairs when they can't find an Englishman to captain the English team!!

I'm sure that the press is lining up its Botham comparisons right now.

The best thing about Vaughan's resignation is that it allows him to recover his batting form with Yorkshire. I'm not convinced that KP's temperament is suited to the captaincy on a long-term basis, but as long as his form doesn't suffer, it has the potential to provide a catalyst for the rest of the side. No way to judge until the series in India's done.

Hmmm - wish Pietersen well but have strong doubts that his appointment will work out. I feel he's too self absorbed and may be an easy target mentally for opposing teams.

Sadly, I feel in twelve months it'll end in tears. Pietersen being regarded by many as a "foreigner" wont help him either.

Personally I'd have gone with Rob Key.

Where have the comments from Moores been throughout all this debacle? His silence is deafening. I'm no fan of yours Aggers because you are a journalistic "Chameleon".Changing your colours daily, " a la Tabloids," but this time you are quite correct !!

Kevin will be a great Captain for England. We as Saffers give him greatfully to you.

Pietersen as captain of England?

Speaking as a lover of cricket, who wants what's best for the game... Ouch. That's going to hurt.

Speaking as an Australian... hey, at least we get to keep the Ashes.

A good column JA. It's nice to hear someone taking the wait and see approach. I've read so many people writing that KP is either completely right or completely wrong when the truth is no one knows yet.

I would have gone for Strauss as he's proven his Captaincy ability and was even begining to captain the one day game well when he drew with Pakistan who had been the run away favourites. He should have been kept on as Captain in 2006 and it makes me a little crazy that he has been unfairly over-looked yet again. I think Captains should be judged by how they perform in the field not this mysterious 'temperament' everyones talking about, Strauus performed brilliantly but as for KP we'll just have to wait and see.

why are people so negative? we are moving into a new and exciting time of english cricket, let's look forward to it! pietersens a good player and hopefully he'll be a good captain but let's not write him off before the start!

as for people uptight about the whole foreigner issue, they didn't mind when he won the ashes for us, so why now? and if i'm right (i might not be) nasser hussain was born in india, strauss was also born in south africa and they've both captained us.

It can't be very nice with half the snobbish cricketing fraternity writing you off before you've even got your feet under the table.
.
I say "Good Luck, Kevin, those of us without chips on our shoulders know you'll give it your best, and we all hope it works out for both you and the England Team"

I think the decision is a bit harsh on Strauss - I don't have a problem with different captains for different forms of the game if needed.

That aside, what we'll really see now is what Moores is made of. It's been difficult for him to come into an established team with a strong and highly experienced captain (particularly one who still rated the previous coach so highly). Perhaps now, Moores can stamp his authority on the team much as Fletcher did. Whether it's the right authority remains to be seen.

One other thing - why was everyone so surprised at Vaughan's departure? I'd almost assumed it would happen on Saturday evening...

kp has never been under pressure?

the odi series against south africa ...no pressure

on his test debut england were 21-5 at lords against the aussies and made top score 57.

at the oval 2005.............no pressure?

400 runs in the 3 live tests in 2006/7

coming out to bat against south africa at lords against dale steyn having cleaned up mv ....no pressure

taking on and ripping the sa attack apart at headingly and edgbaston (all too briefly)

what sets kp apart from ramps and hick etc is the ability to move up a gear when the pressure is on and to ignore a failure as a minor blip not a cause for endless soul searching.

by the way what balance will the team have on thursday: 4 bowlers wont do and 5 batters means one of strauss, bell, colly or bopara will be left out. bell to open?

I was hoping the management would be brave and pick a captain who can bat, as opposed to a batsman who, well `might` be able to captain. Rob Key was my man, because personally I feel he is the next in line ahead of Shah for the no3 slot. Shah can turn it on with his quirkiness and showy attitude in one-day cricket - but Key is the solid professional who can succeed in both forms of the game.

That said, I am happy to support KP as a leader - he seems thoughtful and commited and his pluses will outweigh doubts, I hope.

I am also pleased to see Bopara in, however he should be playing in the Collingwood role, not the Vaughan role - hence my comments re Key.

A change of keeper to Read or Foster - either to bat at 8 behind Broad at 7 - and we would almost looking solid.

Good luck KP!

Anger and aggression are usually a sign that an individual has a lack of discipline. Thus, not a good quality for a good captain to have especially in the 5 day format.

I agree, Strauss would of been the better option, he has a more calm and positive approach.

The English cricketing public can be against Kevin, in favour of him, but can't play without him!

We need to be balanced. On one hand we all want England to be successful and will give every bit of support. Once an individual has been accepted to play for a team he should have full rights, including to be captain.
On the other hand there is little evidence of a (cricketing) intelligence, just overwhelming ego in the new skipper. Above all other sports cricket needs a captain with nous and an astute brain.

Why was Mark Ramprakash never considered as a candidate for captaincy ?

He is fit, in the form of his life and would have been the ideal person for a 2 year period with Cook as VC.

The need to have the same captain for all 3 forms of the game does not make sense. With the amount of cricket played, such a captain would be run into the ground very soon.

The speed at which Vaughan and Collingwood left and KP was appointed was phenomenal, and I hope that it was not at the cost of calm consideration of all options and accommodation of the short and long term. Collingwood may have pre-empted the decision the selectors would have arrived at, having been presented with the opportunity to change both captains after Vaughan's resignation. Regardless of game format, it's difficult to reconcile an eligible 32 year old player being dropped from one squad but being captain of the other for too long.

Having said that, Collingwood's brilliant 100 does make it harder to drop him from the test squad but it would have been interesting to introduce Key to the squad for Vaughan (left / right hand opening options) and Bopara for Collingwood regardless of who was the new skipper. I do think a captain at number 4 is better as there is almost a guaranteed respite period in which to prepare for batting, having been motivating and arranging the bowling and fielding for two days. Radio 5 mentioned Key is good mates with Flintoff and Harmison, which Fletcher wasn't comfortable with and KP and Key may well now be a good new captain and vice captain package, leading to a nice blend of experience, attitudes, youth and talent throughout the squad.

That said it would be nice to extend that to the coaching team. When you think about it, Moores has escaped some of the spotlight which may well now change. To date it's been focused more on the players or the Administrators making it harder to form a measured view on them - other than on results. But wouldn't it be nice to see an experienced, vociferous and judicious ex-international introduced somewhere in the coaching team to inject a new edge and dimension to the setup?

Anyway, nuf said and thanks Aggers for a great summer so far on TMS.

Congratulations to KP - it's a new slate and I'll be rooting for you to do well.

Now go get those Ashes back.

Give the man a chance!

He wasn't my first choice, but now he has the job let's support him, hope he does well and that we have a successful side.

I agree with 'd1ckdrak' that the selectors should have brought themselves a little time and got Strauss to captain at the oval.
They could have then brought in Rob Key instead of Bopara to have a look at him and see how he settles into the team. If he gets some runs and settles then he's the best skipper by far for all three forms of the game and could have been appointed in good time before India.
Key could also groom Cook to take over in a few years.

I suspect the move for KP as skipper was also as much to keep him away from to $$$ at the IPL.

I also recall KP whinging last winter about how tired he was and in need of a break - well no chance of that now especially if he want to go to the IPL !
Still, as an England fan I hope he does well.

Aggers, I bet you miss Vaughan, you seemed to have the perfect balanced relaitionship wth him, mutual respect but you weren't afraid to criticize.
I take it you are a little too wary of KP to say anything remotely negative as yet
For instance, I would have expected you to point out the glaryingly obvious point that a cricket captain should be the best criketting brain in the team, certainly not the most maverick player,

Secondly, and most amazingly after your consistent and vehement complaints around the English born Pattinson being brought into the team as, in your mind, he is an Aussie, while good old KP is most certainly less Englsh than Grimsby born Pattinson, yet not a dicky bird from you about that.

Why was Pattinson's inclusion for one test so galling for you but Pieterson for ENGLAND CAPTAIN, whose as South African as Zola Bud, doesn't warrant a mention?

Let's be honest... whoever was appointed England captain would have divided the country between those who said he was the saviour of English cricket and those wanting to execute him (or those who chose him). That is the nature of the beast. You are never going to please everyone.

Only time will tell how successful KP will be, and surely all we can do in the meantime is support the team and judge him (and them) on results.

We are wonderful in this country at setting up 'heroes' and then taking pleasure in shooting them down again. I'm not a particular fan of KP and i'm suggesting 'blind sycophancy', but at least give the chap a chance before condemning him....

Why are people upping Key so much?
As far as I can see he is averaging around 40 in CC, which isn't spectacular and would only be considered good at Teast match level and Kent have only won the 20/20 slog and not the championship.. so why is he considered to be a great captain?

Is there something I am unaware of, can some one please enlighten me?

I think Michael Vaughan and Paul Collingwood met up over a beer, to end their respective shared captaincy. Their mutual falling on their swords is too coincidential and clean.

Goochiewoochie - Good point re the IPL millions.

Pietersen. Great batsman. There is no "I" in team. In his interviews previously, he never really mentions the team much. Still, that is not a surprise. Cricket is certainly full of individual battles within the wider team game. I sense in this country that we overstate the need to have a defined captain. Surely picking the 11 is best, then chosing the capt from that 11. There is far too much fanfare with this, as there was when Beckham was soccer skipper. The importance of the team and the win must surely rise above all else. I think England have more worries with the batting and balance of their side rather than a lot of pomp about the next skipper. Ambrose has also got to go. Prior and Foster must be streets ahead. Sidebottom looked sluggish. The batsmen as a whole must pull their weight.

should have said 'im NOT suggesting blind sycophancy'...

oops, sorry

There's not much more to be said now KP's in charge of both teams. There will be those who dislike the man himself or the fact that he's not born in England - but to me - credentials count for nothing. KP is the best player we have had (i.e. the most natural talent) since David Gower and I just hope that KP's captaincy and results are better than Gower's. For all Gower's many qualities - I personally found his captaincy lacklustre and uninspiring.

Will KP succeed? I wish him all the luck in the world - but I predict he will fail miserably. I suspect the fact that he seems to love the limelight will very soon fail because it now won't be on his terms.

I think KP loves the limelight because, quite simply, he's the best in the team and he knows it as do we. If either his performance slips (as most do when made skipper) or the team's fortunes don't pick up - the limelight that he enjoys "Well done KP, how did you feel when you were 150 not out having hit 20 off Brett Lee's over?" will soon become "Why didn't you bowl Fred instead of Sidebottom - we might have won the game otherwise?" which will be a difficult thing to handle. Remember Kevin Keegan's infamous remark "Failure doesn't come easily to Kevin Keegan"?

It now seems certain that, KP's results as captain notwithstanding, we will have an unsettled side for the Ashes. Normally I'd say this puts us at a loss but the Aussies are nowhere near the side they were and unless they unearth some gems this winter - it could actually be a 3rd/4th place battle because the best Test side in the world (to me) look to be India right now with SA probably 2nd. This takes no notice of the ICC rankings.

Whilst standing by my original comment (ist post) if they did have to promote from within then the choice was easy. Whilst I believe Key should have brought in KP is not the selfish s** some people seem to think he is. All great players at any sport have a touch of arrogance but the way he nursed and encouraged Collingwood through the early part of his innings was tremendous. Cook could have been an alternative if going for youth as SA did with Smith but otherwise who else? Certainly not Strauss who although he did a great job in Pakistan seems to be hanging onto his position in the side by his fingernails.

I see great things for england now incl. a possible world cup!!!!



Only joking guys, we know england are not yet at that level. They first have to concentrate on losing the ashes!

RobM - having said there is 'not much more to be said', you go on for 4 full paragraphs...

I don't understand why the only choices for captain seem to be our "best" batsmen. Having a natural talent for hitting the ball is barely connected with making strategic (or even tactical ) decisions in any form of the game. I wish KP all the best, but I fear the worst, and he is definitely an easy target for Aussies and Saffers to have a go at verbally if he slips just for a moment. And he can't resist risking all for personal glory.

In reply to an earlier post, the difference between KP's failed 6 and Collingwood's successful one, was that KP just hit the next available ball when he got to 94, whereas PC waited for a bad ball to hit, hence the difference in outcome. KP should have made 200 that day, but blew it.

Personally, my hopes are in hibernation until Stuart Broad has the experience to take on the captain's job...

Good luck KP - you're going to need it. The next time England are 35-2 you are going to feel the pressure, for everyone is going to be watching just how you handle the situation.

If you play your normal game and get bowled round your legs whilst trying to reverse sweep a fast bowler, you are going to be vilified. If you play a 'respsonsible' innings and take 3 hrs to score 40, the pundits will surely think that you have been 'got at' by a poor coach.

Vinnyroe - the reason why quality with the bat is a necessary consideration for choosing a captain is conveniently highlighted by the demise of MPV.

Whoever was appointed captain necessarily had to be assured of his place up to and including next summer's ashes, otherwise the selectors may be forced to change captains again. The only batsman who can be assured of his place until then is KP.

MPV was (in most peoples' eyes) a very accomplished captain, and when he was appointed was one of the very best batsmen in the world. Over time, however, his batting form faded away and led many people in the press and on these boards to say that he could not keep his place on captaincy alone.

The difficulty for the selectors is that KP is the ONLY member of England's top six that can be assured of his place at Test level, let alone in both forms of the game. Strauss, who is many peoples' choice for captain, was dropped only two series ago, and would have been dropped again had it not been for his 170-odd in NZ. Even since then, his form has been patchy and he has made no contributions of note against the Saffers. It is very possible that Strauss will be dropped between now and next summer's ashes and the same can be said for the rest of England's top 6, even if Cook and Bell currently look slightly more secure than Strauss and Collingwood.

If Rob Key was brought back in as a batsman alone, he would be under tremendous pressure to prove himself at this level, which he has failed to do in the past.

Agree on batsmen vinny roe. what about aggers for capt?>

What is it with this idea of having one captain for all three forms of the game? It doesn't really stack up from a team-unity point of view as they are such different formats they could easily have a different captain.

I can't help wondering that there is some more subtle meaning at work here. With the rise of T20 there is genuine fear within the ICC that T20 will split away from mainstream cricket and mainstream cricket administration (ICC). With the levels of revenue that IPL/Stamford are generating this will risk ICC coffers and more importantly risk the status of test cricket of the pinacle of the game.

Could the ECB's desire to have a single captain have more to do with a desire to ensure that the game continues in a unified manner, thus protecting their recently-discovered, lucrative income stream?

Whatever happened to best man for the job? Strange that possibly the next best test cricket brain (Straus) is not considered for test captain because of his inability to play limited overs (and obviously current lack of form).

Why on earth do the selectors feel that wwe need one captain for all sides? Australia (who are not bad at the game) has gone for two captains.

Have we lerned no lessons from the last Ashes series? We promoted a talented but (by the nature of what he does) self-centred person to the captain's role. The result was a 0-5 whitewash. Are we destined to repeat this?

I'm getting bored of this.

Vaughan was not "hounded out by the media." No-one in the media was calling for Vaughan's head, they were reporting the fact that he couldn't buy a run. This in itself would've placed him under pressure.

If Rob Key had been called in as captain it would have made English cricket the laughing stock of world cricket.

Not only would we have elevated a player who has not played interational, let alone Test, cricket for a number of years to the pinnacle of our national sport, but we would have been replacing Vaughan - a captain in the side simply because of captanicy skills - with Key - a captain in the side just because of his captaincy skills.

I love that everyone is playing judge jury and executioner - "His form will falter, he won't be a good man-manager, he's too selfish," blah, blah, blah.

Let us judge him when he has actually led the team on to the field shall we?!

I wish KP all the best, and hope he leads us to glory all the way through to the Ashes next year. Of course, if he does so it will have been for purely selfish reasons!

What's with the pre-mod?

If Rob Key was second choice, surely he should be included within the team??? D'oh!

Hopefully KP can 'push' Peter Moores out the door, and really ring the changes.

It's such a shame that certain past greats in English cricket aren't able to be more involved in the team's makeup.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Well, it's broke, so do something about it. New captain is a good start, but don't just stop there. We had a chance to experiment in the next test, but again, the big cheeses do diddley...

How can Strauss still be in the team? And Collingwood? Bet they stay there until we lose the Ashes again.

Bring back Tresco...

The key here is that England's batting had become weak with Vaughan at 3, or at least were perceived to be weak. That perception makes such a difference to the fielding opposition. They have felt 4 men out, all out, pretty much all summer. Bell at 3 should give us more cohesion.

Bopara has just GOT to be the man to galvanise England at no.6, a proper batsman but one whose bowling has been good enough to get him 20 1st class wickets this season. He is a good enough 4th seamer to bowl enough overs to give Flintoff a rest, though I did say that about Colly! Fred can also bat at 7, or even 8 if we find a quality batting wicketkeeper, so the side really does have balance with Bopara at 6 and 5 in-form batsman above him (assuming Collingwood is now in form! I still think Shah is a better bet for the Ashes).

Harmison MUST come back now, as I said before the last test. Two strike bowlers are better than one! So it's Sideo or Anderson to make way. I say Sidebottom needs to get properly fit again, he was well off the pace in the 3rd test, whilst Jimmy continues to frustrate at times. Tricky one.

I'll wager the selectors stick with those 2 seamers and leave our 2nd most potent fast bowler out again, meanwhile overbowling Flintoff and finishing his ankle off for good. Fools!

Michael Vaughan is an outsatnding captain. There is no other captain in the side anywhere near his standard. Captaincy is an art in its own right, and he falls into the Brearley, Atherton, Benaud mould of those who understand the game so deeply that they are invaluable in their own right. A few years ago he was the best batsman in the world. He has not suddely become a bad batsman, just a batsman out of form. Class is permanebnt, form is temporary. The selctors should have told him all of this and persuaded him to stay on. You will not persuade me that the Vaughan package - captaincy, leadership, experience and runs ahead of him is worse than the Bopara option.

As for KP - he is just too reactive and emotional. See how many times he has failed to manage the situation he has found himself in as a batsman. Either he does not see situations (which makes him an unlikley captain) or he cannot control his instincts and bring objectivity to the cause. Brilliant and destructive though he is, he is not the man for the captaincy.

Without Vaughan I think it probably had to go to Strauss, but that option is also worse than a temporarily out of form Vaughan.

Thanks hoody1975, I'll see if I can get time off my day job. If I can't the job's all yours.

Oh Yeah, Rob Key should do it, that guy who's been in the Test team and knows all the players and has been in great nick for England against New Zealand and South Africa.

Not KP, who's just been knocking around in the county side for the past few months... Certainly not him...

Or have i got them mixed up?

KP is the right guy to do it- he'll roast those Aussie like my favorite KP Peanuts.

Captaincywise, what the hell do any of us know? We've never even met any of the protagonists! Who would have guessed Gower was not that good at captaincy whilst Brearley was top notch? Only the pros can make an educated guess as to who can cut the mustard at the top level. They think KP can so that's the end of it as far as we amateur pundits are concerned.

I will agree that your captain needs to be worth his place as a player, esp if you're lacking proper fit batting allrounders, and you desperately want 5 bowlers.

Rob Key for Skipper by this time next year when we are 3 down against the ozzies. KP is bound to have jumped ship by then and run off to earn some serious cash somewhere.

Bring back Tresco(total legend that is was)? Gladstone Small has more chance of playing for England again. Of course it must be Moore's fault... always blame the coach. It is the easy way out. The players need to face the responsibility. England is like an old boys club. If you don't wear the right tie, you don't get in. It was like that under Fletcher and it has been like that with the senior players until now. It's about time the coach put his foot down and made the XI play for their places rather than waltz in when they fancy.

I have considerable experience as a team captain, albeit at a somewhat lower level than that of the England team. Nevertheless I don't suppose Pietersen will have dealt with the matter of fielders wearing the wrong colour trousers, smoking on the boundary. nor yet a wicketkeeper who insists on taking a half bottle of chilled white wine onto the field of play.

All of this affected my performance as a batsman and my average dropped from 8.2 to under 4 in a single season.

If we see a drop in Pietersen's average of over 50% will it have been worth it for his skills as a captain? I don't think so...

Pieterson is not a team player. Lets see what happens in two/three days time.

I think it's safe to read a little more into there being "no way of accommodating Andrew Strauss in the one day set-up". I think this means Twenty20 set-up which is now viewed (for sad financial reasons) as more important than ODIs. Strauss could easily open the innings in ODIs but Cook is more in favour. Strauss is slightly less convincing for the T20s (as is Cook!).

My guess is that Cook will captain in the future. It's a shame Key hasn't had an opportunity at Test level in recent years as he may have proved ideal in all forms, including T20.

Still, good luck KP. Good luck England.

Quality Loadicean2!!! I think KP will command the respect of the England team, what with that tattoo and the dainty walk he does. I think the middle eastern neck worry beads may have to go though.

Out if interest I though I would mention that this makes KP the 4th South African to captain England:

Tony Greig
Allan Lamb
Andrew Strauss
and now KP....

Do people think he will bowl a bit more now he is Captain?

So Bopara comes in for MV. Is he going to bat at three if we go for four bowlers? Will Bell be number three.well that's been tried before and why no mention of Shah who doesn't seem to have done much wrong. No 3 position is pivotal, a real horses for courses role. Here was a chance to put together a changed side in a dead rubber to see if any nuggets of talent grab the chance to get a place on the winter tours.

Breaking news... A lass i know organises the sandwiches and cakes etc(from the caterers) for the lunches when england play at the oval. She has just been informed of a new menu than the reg one MVP chose. Not many people know that one of the team capt's duties is to fix the lunch and tea menu up pre match. She just told me that Ham chees and pickle are gone, tp be replaced by crab and weak american mustard?! Also, Smoked Salmon is given out and Red Pepper Humus is next in?! But get this, here is the really amazing bit... KP has asked that all the crusts be cut from the bread! There's the Dunkirk spirit.

I can't afford £38 a month to watch Sky. I am not pretending to be poor but it is a massive expense.

Surely I have the right to watch my own national Cricket team for a reasonable fee? Without me and 50 million other English they wouldn't be able to call themselves England.

When will the ECB realise that they need to get more people watching the game, rather than going for short term gain.

Aggers

It's completely pointless who captains the side if no one can see them on TV. At the moment, the only way to watch a cricketer on TV for my village is to either buy Sky or watch some abysmal reality programme on BBC1 about ballroom dancing.

I'm trying to start a cricket team here in very north Derbyshire - no Channel 5 here - and we've got kids who not only have never played the game, but never even seen one. How does the BBC answer that as part of their commitment to the notion of public service broadcasting?

Time for:

1, You to grill your TV bosses on how they think they're serving the wider community. It's odd that scheduling and budget knows no bounds when it comes to football finals.

2. Asking Giles Clark whether instead of using cricket's new millions to line KP's back pocket he would care to use some of the cash to buy back the TV rights from Sky and help out terrestrial TV.

[Personal details removed by Moderator]

England should have won the last match against SA as smith had clearly gloved one ball from monty but that was not given....
these small small things changes the course of the match.....

Solanki has his 1000 runs for the season. Any takers? Allthese rumours about the selectors going by numbers(Pattinson) if true seem to be used for bowlers only and not in form batsmen.

Agnew - Good to know that Moores is your new whipping boy to be blamed for all the ills in cricket.

Can you let me know how long Pieterson's honeymoon will be before you start putting the boot into him at every opportunity like you did with Vaughan....

Solanki may have scored lot of runs but he is definitely not a good player of quality spin bowling..and in test cricket you need to play well against murali and all

Look, All this talk about problems in the dressing room is simply not true, its the press trying to find a story where there is none..... Of course there will be conflict, but conflict is good if managed in the right way. If you have no difference of opinion things will never get done. I can assure you that the players and staff are puzzled to how these stories have started. And quite frankly the players are little disspointed in Agnew for picking up on gossip genereated by the media and making it the core of his blog. Agnew in the players eyes has lost some credibilty, his blog is lazy and without foundation. Come on Jonanthon you can do better than that.

Having Pietersen in charge is like putting Rooney as England Soccer captain. Fine player, potentially disastrous leader. Vaughan had to go, he was not contributing runs, but the captain needs a calm head. Strauss did a great job as captain, Collingwood too. Flintoff and Botham were disasters as captains, on and off the field, and here we go again....

The ECB is overseeing a broken system in which apparently no native player can be raised to the rank of captain instead of 'naturalizing' a foreigner, as per ClarenceSquare's comments. And do you honestly think the South African's will let the cocky new English captain, who wasn't prepared to rise through the ranks in his own country, beat them at the Oval, even though its a dead rubber?? If you thought the Aussie's stuck it to him via his relationship with Warnie, just wait until the Protea's really test his application of his vast captaincy skills and we see whether KP's personal glory includes that of his adopted countries.

True Solanki may not play Murali well but players only learn how to deal with quality bowling by playing against it. I just threw his name into the hat as since Marcus packed it in we do not have an opening batsman that can take the attack to the bowlers. Watching poor old Staruss struggling along is painful and puts more pressure on his partner.

Despite the uncritical approval of Mr Agnew the process of appointment of the new England captain is incomprehensible, amateurish and catastrophically flawed.
There is a rich literature from the corporate sector on the constituent elements of 'authentic leadership' and its correlation with success. I doubt that even one of the people who appointed Peterson even knew of the existence of this literature - let alone had ensured that Peterson had completed one of a number of well validated tests that can provide a robust measure of authentic leadership potential - and help to dispel the dangerous myth of the 'merits' of charismatic leadership (cf Botham/Flintoff).
As, if not more, vacuous was Mr Agnew's 5 Live comment that it was wrong to question Peterson's 'tactical credentials' as they were, as yet, unproven. In that case it would make as much (and as little) sense to pop the names of the England Team into a hat and select the first name to come out.
Want to test Peterson's tactical nous? Ask him where the flagrant flaws were in the tactics employed by England in the South African second innings at Edgbaston - when their quick bowlers had no coherent and sustained method of bowling at Smith. It does not take a tactical mastermind to recognise that bowling a foot outside off to a packed offside would have strangled his flow of runs, put far more pressure on his partners and taken the game, at the very least, into a final day - when a refreshed attachk might still have won a game that was abjectly surrendered.
If he has as little clue as did Vaughan (or Moores) then he should not even be considered.
I groaned when I heard on Five Live that Gooch had 'backed' Peterson for the captaincy. Gooch was a prime example of someone who led by strength of personality but had no strategic and almost no tactical acumen - I remember him losing a Test to Pakistan in circumstances not dissimilar to Edgbaston when Wasim and Waquar (as batsmen) were allowed to take the game away from England in a post tea fourth day session.
Captaincy demands an unusual blend of leadership, man-management, tactical insight and reactive flexibility. The failure to distinguish these discrete elements of captaincy lies at the heart of much of the muddled (absence of) thinking about the next England appointment (and that of Vaughan's stand-in for the last Ashes).
The oft-repeated mantra that you need one captain for all forms of the game is simply silly. The nature and balance of demand in relation to the above elements is utterly different in each specific format. Does anyone seriously believe that the same kind of tactical insight is required to make bowling and field changes in the stir-fry of 20/20 as in the slow roast of a Test match.
The importance and impact of captaincy is directly proportionate to the length of a format - in 20/20 the impact is negligible - in Test cricket significant.
An excellent captain is a necessary precondition to - though not a sufficient cause of - success in the next (and subsequent) Ashes series.
Just as absurd as the clamour for 'one' captain is the notion that you need (or should tolerate) one coach for each of the profoundly different formats of the modern game. Imagine a sprinter being coached by someone whose specialism was the marathon - or vice versa.
It was always clear that Fletcher was a marathon/Test coach, bored and distracted by one day cricket. Moores, at best, may be an adeuate 'limited overs' (not 20/20) coach.
England need new coaches and new approaches to each form of the game - it is possible that the same players may be picked in different formats and by these different coaches - but if so it should be on format specific merit - not the force majeur of being members of an 'elite'.
Who is the best Captain - well, possibly within 20/20 and under the direction of an authoritative coach, Peterson might be adequate. In the longer limited overs version, Robert Keyes - were he not the best of the available Test Captains. That he very probably is - though robust diagnostic tests, tactical simulations and 360 degree evaluations would be needed to test out what is (in the absence of substantial evidence) little more than a hunch (albeit, in his case, informed by an impressive track record as captain of Kent).
Who would be the best Test coach - without a shadow of a doubt (and if prepared to take on the task), Shane Warne. Had he, rather than Ponting captained Australia in the last series in England our single recent Ashes success would, in all probability, never have occured.
Finally, there needs to be robust, authoritative and effective Governance of the risibly styled 'Team England'. Governance, I hasten to add, is neither leadership nor management - though such a distinction seems to be lost on the ECB, Geoff Miller, Peter Moores and Michael Vaughan - until the latter became, in the Pattinson incident, a victim of the resultant confusion. The task of governance is to establish strategic priorities and goals, to prescribe the means that can legitimately be employed and to ensure that the necessary executive leadership and management is in place and remains accountable for performance and the pursuit of the strategic goals to those who govern.
Cricket is a multi-million pound industry with a (an extremely expensive) governance, leadership and management infrastructure whose complexity and muddle would shame a local charity. It is high time that it entered the 21st century. Until it does so we should not be surprised that abject confusion and incompetence at the top finds a painful echo on the front line - whether at Lords, Melbourne or Cape Town. It is equally certain that no world class coach would agree to work within such a dysfunctional and dreadful structure - only the needy and the no hopers will accept - thus perpetuating a dispiriting cycle of false expectaion and disillusioned failure
Yours despondently
Professor Paul Stanton
Northumbria University

Millsy - the implication from your post is that you are part of, or at least close to, the England set-up?

I am very saddened and bitter about what has happened to MV and returning to the office today I couldn't wait to have my say. Firstly I would like to thank MV for all his efforts over the last 5 years and admire the courage and dignity of his resignation, the sniping from the media and ill-informed clueless cricket fans have put paid to him. My first thought was he hasn't even reached Atherton's mark of captaining England, who is the worst capt. we've ever had, it defies belief. It seems most of you agree that it we have lost a great leader and captain. The point about Collingwood finding his form why not MV I think is particularly relevant. Surely the whole point is to replace players with better, if you can't then don't change for the sake of it. There have been accusations that England have become a cosy liitle shop but I just can't see that, where are the players better than we currently have. If someone is knocking on the door then fair enough, but I can't see one. Those talking about Strauss and Bell as capt. HA I almost fell off my chair, two months ago they were playing for the places.
Ultimately MV has paid the price for Moores, Miller and Morris the 3 incompetent M's and until they go we won't get better. Bopara at full tilt is not as good as a half tilt MV so we are already a batsmen short. KP as captain is a backward step and I fear for the future.
This latest episode has disillusioned me so much that I think thats it with the game, let the Agnews and Athertons have it, bitter twisted ex players with medicore records. As for some of the fans writing in I wonder what planet they are from, has anyone else noticed that west country supporters seem to have it in for MV more than others?
The quote from the bloke in Brum about now Ambrose batting at 8 there is more balance is hilarious, he shouldn't be batting at number 8 in the England Z side never mind the A side, I wonder frankly whether he's good enough at county level. Another example of local bias for a player at the expense of England.
Graeme Smith is not known for handing out praise to anyone never mind the opposition, his words sum up how our opponents view MV and we should listen (RESPECT), Ponting must be laughing his head off. I fear all is lost for next few years I just hope I get the chance to see MV cover drive one more time at test level, I fear not though as I can't see another captain working with him or Moores for that matter, they know they are inferior and quite rightly would find themselves undermined. So goodbye and good luck MV the last 5 years have been memorable, even this series has been griiping despite losing hope you win a championship with Yorks as a farewell.

Rob Key? Since when has a player not good enough to play for England ever been made captain?
In his 15 tests he has amassed a total of 775 runs at an average of 31. Yes, his highest test score is 221, but against a Windies side that England beat 4-0, the first time England has ever won all the Tests in one series against West Indies.
He has averaged the following against top opposition:
Australia: 17.63
India: 27.00
SA: 25.5
Sorry, he may be a great 'captain' but he's not a very good player, simple as. Sorry Rob.

The ECB have rushed blindly into a decision again. I would like a sole captain of the team in all forms of the game, but there is no point unifying the role of if there is no-one suitable.

My view. Strauss for test captain, KP for shorter forms.

Graeme Smith was 22 years old when he was handed the captaincy of SA and look how they're repeaing the rewards now! That decision was criticised as it was felt that he had shown 'few leadership credentials'. Groom Alistair Cook for the role either before or after the Ashes!

I just wonder what the Aussies are thinking of all this!? Probably crying into their Champagne!

My only comment to the selectors would be "KP - Nuts!"

SeLondonWloves...

How about Christopher Cowdrey...?

cityboy105....

I rest my case!

How the hell can Rob Key be in contention???? I just don't get it, it's like saying Trevor Sinclair should be captain of England football team because he's playing well and he played for England 2 yrs ago or so.

The suggestion that a player who has hardly played for England be in contention to lead let alone anchor a place in the team ... if it was made within the footballing circles would be ridiculed to the rafters.

No wonder we're light yrs behind the Aussies, they pick the team first and then the captain. That's just not common sense but sane at the same time. Name me another International captain who has come in from the blue without playing for the team in the last 2 yrs and then appointed.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Why is everybody so worried about KPs birthplace?
Don't forget that other England Cricket Captains have been born abroad -
Andrew Strauss, Allan Lamb and Tony Greig in South Africa, Nasser Hussain and Colin Cowdrey in India, Tony Lewis in Wales, Mike Denness in Scotland, Ted Dexter in Italy, Donald Carr in Germany and Freddie Brown in Peru.
That makes 10 of the 35 captains in the last 60 years!

Good point Murphy100. Having said that there is surely an argument for him getting another chance as watching Strauss struggle is painful.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Prof Stanton promulgates a wonderful thesis regarding selection of a captain for our test team - by comparison against established leadership criteria. But clearly there is a major flaw when the answer comes out as Rob Key - Kent don't look like winning anything this season.

Prof Stanton would also do well to recognise that the captain should also be worth his place in the team - which Key certainly is not.

I certainly wish KP well in his new role and fervently hope that he is successful - but Alastair Cook is the future, and he should be ready to take the reins of leadership when the need arises.

I’m disappointed that no one within the England camp picked up on Michael Vaughans state of mind. He needs to recharge his batteries and start enjoying cricket again. Had this been identified he could have been given the option of returning to County cricket, a winter spent at home and the opportunity to return as captain, form permitting, in time for The Ashes series. Instead a very proud man was backed into a corner and left very exposed for all to see.

With respect to KP I’m not sure anybody really knows what to expect and more importantly whether the added responsibility will impact on his batting. I feel the choices were limited being either uninspiring or just as risky as the appointment of KP. It could be argued that Rob Key may have been worth a try although coming straight into the side as captain would have bought added pressure.

I often see KP described as a selfish player which, if true, suggests his time in charge may prove a struggle. Personally I find a lot of the criticism completely unjustified. For sure he is very driven to succeed but whats wrong with that? His individual achievements with the bat can only benefit the team. His second innings departure at Egbaston seems to have provoked near universal condemnation. It was actually the same shot that Collingwood reached his century with. How ironic that a lesser batsman so desperately out of form was able to execute the shot more successfully than one of the worlds best. I suppose everything would have been fine had he edged tamely to the keeper playing defensively? I for one am prepared to keep an open mind and judge his leadership on merit but most of all pray that the responsibility doesn’t change his approach to batting.

If it really is true that Strauss was not considered for the captaincy because he is not part of the one day set up, how can that possible elevate Key to second choice?

If they think Key is, in contrast to Strauss, worthy of a place in both squads, then why hasn't he been selected? If they don't think he currently merits a place in the squads, then how can they suggest that he, again in contrast to Strauss, is a plausible option as captain?

Selection isn't simply, even predominantly, a matter of logic and clear thinking. But if selectors aren't capable of thinking clearly and consistently, then it makes it all the more likely that they'll get things wrong.

Ah yes, Professor Paul Stanton of Northumbria University, but for all your wise and long comments about the ignorance and inadequacies of the selectors (I agree), and your comments on Aggers (I disagree) at least we can say one thing about all of them:









they know how to spell Pietersen!!!


:-(

I hope that KP turns out to be a great captain - we will just have to wait and see. I'd also like to say thanks you to Michael Vaughan for representing his country so well. I really hope that he recovers his form and enjoys his cricket.

I don't think that KP from SA is the issue, I think its why he came here, his previous experience and the dirth of players that have been groomed/have capacity to take the reigns which is disturbing - and BTW Boulanger46, it's more than 10!
https://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_19990627/ai_n14226428

I bet the Aussies are licking their lips

I have some reservations about KP as the skipper , but surely we should give him a chance?See how he goes before complaining about the appointment, no?

Also cannot see why the push for Robert Key: Strauss was apparently not a chance because he wasn't in the one day team, yet Key hasn't been in either team for years! Doesn't seem logical.....

Throw away your wicket: lose England the test; lose England the series; and what reward do you get?
England captaincy.
How's that for performance related benefits!

O

I guess the reservations that most people have relate to the fact that KP has on more than one occasion failed miserably to appreciate the tactical position of games he has been in a position to influence. Cavalier innings on several occasions during this SA series have diminished his efforts in my opinion and it appears SA have got his number or should I say his ego. The last test was a classic example where a more aware approach may well have brought him a big century, avoided the exposure of two new batsmen and their wickets late on the 3rd day and given England a chance to put real pressure on for the last two days. For me its the difference between being a very good England player and potentially a great England player and before it gets mentioned the feeble and inconsistent efforts of the other batsmen in the team don't excuse the above failings.

Saying all that I hope the captaincy focuses his immense talent and I wish him all the very best.