Pieterson's selfish end to innings

[mcphee_is_a_gun]

Did anybody else think the way Pieterson batted towards the end of his innings to get to the 100 was rather selfish? in my mind it cost England 20-25 runs that could of made a difference.

 

[Grimreepah]

The first half of Petersen's innings was top class, then he slowed a little when wickets fell which is fine. But then he just took singles right up to the 47th over to get him his 100, and obviously Australia were happy to let him do that. He could have really hurt us, so it was a bit of a let off IMO.

 

[Romeo]

I think he was making a statement to his English critics who slammed him for not making 100's as opposed to getting out for quicker half tons. The point he was making is that if he hasn't got support it's irrelevant for him to make a ton and stay there and anchor the innings when he's at his best when he plays naturally. He tired a bit because of the heat and we bowled well with the old ball towards the end, especially Tait.

 

[RoosterLad]

Made a statement to the critics? So he put himself before the team? They could have scored 270 or 280 and actually had half a chance of winning the match, that was never going to be enough against our World Champion batting attack.

 

[Power21]

I think he was making a statement to his English critics who slammed him for not making 100's as opposed to getting out for quicker half tons. The point he was making is that if he hasn't got support it's irrelevant for him to make a ton and stay there and anchor the innings when he's at his best when he plays naturally. He tired a bit because of the heat and we bowled well with the old ball towards the end, especially Tait.

He isn't smart enough to make any point to critics, and if he did do it to make a point at the downfall of his team, then that's about as selfish as you can get.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

He isn't smart enough to make any point to critics, and if he did do it to make a point at the downfall of his team, then that's about as selfish as you can get.

Pietersen plays for Pietersen, nobody else.

 

[demon21]

Here we go again he makes a hundred and people still bag him if he gets out cheap people still bag him give it a rest people.

 

[WC6320]

Definately was thinking of himself. The very first ball after reaching his ton he started slogging after about 5 overs of hitting singles. Very obvious that all he was thinking about was acheiving his century.

 

[Romeo]

Definately was thinking of himself. The very first ball after reaching his ton he started slogging after about 5 overs of hitting singles. Very obvious that all he was thinking about was acheiving his century.

Well the critics have been on his back for not making tons. He answered them. Anyway he's not a pom so why can't he play for himself?

 

[Betfair Punter]

If i could compare it to a situation, its the end of test day 3, australia have a 390 run lead, probably a bit short, out comes adam gilchrist, final session starts, aussies went to send the england back in later in the evening to test a few. Gilchrist in this situation would not worry about getting 50, 100 or whatever , its about team goals, and not individualistic goals. The Australian team play as a team, as shown by their record in the past 10-15 years. That innings reminded me of Graeme Hick's innings at the MCG, when Michael Atherton rightfully declared the innings, when Greame Hick was on 98 not out. Hick had his chance to get the 100, but selfishly bat bat and batted and was more worredi about his ton.

 

[Betfair Punter]

ALSO i could understand if he was a fringe player in the team: like a Strauss, Vaughan, Joyce for example and needed a 100 to cement his spot. Whereas pietersen is pretty much guranteed to be in the squad for the next 20 games.

 

[Cooldude]

He was blocking a high amount of full tosses and half volleys for singles, was not even attempting to put them to the fence. That alone proves he was playing for his ton and no effort to get more runs, which in turn means he's selfish. Though it's something we've already known: Pietersen only plays for Pietersen

 

[mbuck]

maybe secretly, he wanted england to lose so south africa have more of a chance to go through?

ooh conspiracy

 

[CF]

It was his selfish batting in the last 10 overs that prevented England getting 270+. He was taking singles and getting off strike when he should have been taking risks and trying to hit the ball to the boundry. It wasn't like Mcgrath was bowling that well. But the pom supporters have blinkers on and think it was an innings of greatness. But at the time even the pommy commentators were saying he was being selfish. I lost some respect for him in this innings. The Aussie batsmen may be arrogant sods but they always put the team first. England seems to be a side of individuals at the moment, rather than a team.

 

[ShearMagic9]

Yes.

What a dud.

Can't go about making a century against Australia at a SR of 85.

Lets sack the bastard.

Simply not good enough

 

[likka]

Yes.

What a dud.

Can't go about making a century against Australia at a SR of 85.

Lets sack the bastard.

Simply not good enough

He put himself and his aspirations to make a ton ahead of the team. Did you really not see this or are you just wearing your English hat?

England really needed another 20-25 runs to be competitive in the run chase, he knew this too.

 

[eddiesmith]

There are also 2 batsman out there and our no7 should be a speciallist at smashing from the first ball, instead he was striking at 50, if Bopara was hitting them like he is in the team for then we would have won, nothing to do with KP

 

[Browney2006]

KP and Bell were easily our best players, everyone else was ****ing pathetic, yet everyone is blaming KP for the Loss?

 

[likka]

There are also 2 batsman out there and our no7 should be a speciallist at smashing from the first ball, instead he was striking at 50, if Bopara was hitting them like he is in the team for then we would have won, nothing to do with KP

Even more reason to try and take some initiative instead of simply turning the strike over to a batsman that was so obviously struggling.

He had "KP ton tunnel vision" and failed to see it in the context of a WC game his country simply had to win.

 

[likka]

KP and Bell were easily our best players, everyone else was ****ing pathetic, yet everyone is blaming KP for the Loss?

Not blaming him for the loss, just highlighting the selfishness of his innings.

Poms needed 275 minimum but KP seemed only really interested in his ton. Didn't even look disappointed when he holed out soon after getting the ton.

 

[eddiesmith]

Even more reason to try and take some initiative instead of simply turning the strike over to a batsman that was so obviously struggling.

He had "KP ton tunnel vision" and failed to see it in the context of a WC game his country simply had to win.

Actually it was good as he found some form, gave the bowlers something to bowl at instead of slogging out and us collapsing for 200 and now he should be right to take control of must win games coming up against weaker opposition

 

[ShearMagic9]

There are also 2 batsman out there and our no7 should be a speciallist at smashing from the first ball, instead he was striking at 50, if Bopara was hitting them like he is in the team for then we would have won, nothing to do with KP

Alas.

He was the set batsman, already striking at 90. The batsmen coming in should have been the ones going for it other than just blocking. KP was striking the ball well, but there was fielders wherever he was hitting it.

It would've benefited the team by him going for the tonk and getting out wouldnt it????

Why do people always have to have a go at him??? Without his and Bells efforts we wouldve been screwed. I came on here fully expecting this garbage, and only 1 or 2 people have actually said well batted KP. What doesnt that surprise me???

Looks like KP should just stop playing, because he his never going to get the praise he deserves.

 

[Grimreepah]

our no7 should be a speciallist at smashing from the first ball, instead he was striking at 50

No, the no7 should be getting off strike so the in form batsman can try and hit boundaries in the final overs.

 

[CF]

No, the no7 should be getting off strike so the in form batsman can try and hit boundaries in the final overs.

exactly right....and yet KP was happy to take a single and get off strike so he could protect his wicket.

 

[Boro]

Anyone having a go at KP after his innings needs their head read. England didn't make an extra 25-50 runs because no other batsman (apart from Bell) stood up to the task. Not because KP slowed his scoring rate as he neared 100. Some great bowling from the Australians didn't help matters either. If only Hayden and Gilchrist were both given out in the first two overs things might have been different. The battle for 4th spot is still on for another few days at least though so its game on.