What's new

Kevin Pietersen undermines Joe Root's record, says batting is easier today than before

KP was a special player, injuries & off-field issues robbed him a little, he was the closest batter to Viv Richards in Tests who made their debut post 2005. At his best, he could brutalise some of the greatest players to ever play the game, and it has to be said, during his time the top 5-6 in the world were very strong. So I can understand him feeling a tad jealous because of all the capabilities he had and leaving on a bit of a sour note and perhaps not as appreciated as he should be. I rate him very highly, however, Joe Root would do well in any era, he’s a rock solid hand, mentally tough, gritty, reliable and England’s most consistent batter ever, in-fact his numbers would be even better if he was never captain, that stint weighed on him heavily; Root is up there with the greatest of all time.
 
Pietersen has a point

Kulsener? (a good batting all-rounder in white ball cricket only)

Both Dale Steyn and Saqlain Mushtaq deserve to be in that list ahead of some of the others..
 

Kevin Pietersen did not often bowl, although he first came to English attention when he represented KwaZulu-Natal as an off-spinner on England’s 1999-2000 tour of South Africa, but he has delivered some bouncers at Joe Root.
Root in the course of his 150 at Old Trafford rose to second place in the all-time list of Test run-scorers. But this was not enough to impress Pietersen. Far from it. He declared, like a real old-timer, that batting was twice as hard back in his day.
“Don’t shout at me but batting these days is way easier than 20/25 years ago!” Pietersen posted on X. “Probably twice as hard back then.”

Pietersen names 22 bowlers of his time and dares the cricket follower of today to name 10 to compare with them.
Of his contemporaries, he nominates four Australians: Glenn McGrath, Brett Lee, Jason Gillespie and Shane Warne; four Pakistanis in Waqar Younis, Shoaib Akhtar, Wasim Akram and Mushtaq Ahmed; three Indians in Anil Kumble, Javagal Srinath and Harbhajan Singh; three New Zealanders in Shane Bond, Chris Cairns and Daniel Vettori; three South Africans in Allan Donald, Shaun Pollock and, bizarrely, Lance Klusener but not Dale Steyn; two Sri Lankans in Chaminda Vaas and Muttiah Muralitharan; and two West Indians in Curtly Ambrose and Courtney Walsh.

A single England bowler was nominated by Pietersen in Darren Gough. His colleagues in the Ashes-winning attack of 2005 seem not to have impressed him.

Most of the variable factors in Test cricket have changed little in this century: balls, pitches, DRS and so forth. The biggest change has been the impact of T20 – the first professional T20 tournament was started in England in 2003, by when Pietersen was starting out for Nottinghamshire.

My interpretation, therefore, would be that Pietersen is wrong to say that the standard of pace bowling has gone down. The finest seamers today are a match for their equivalents of “20/25 years ago”.

“Please name me 10 modern bowlers that can compare to the names above,” Pietersen goes on to say.
Well, in that case, Australia’s Pat Cummins, Mitchell Starc, Josh Hazlewood and Nathan Lyon can all compare; South Africa’s Kagiso Rabada is up with his forebears, not bowling so fast but moving the ball more; Mark Wood and Jofra Archer have been timed as England’s quickest ever; New Zealand’s Will O’Rourke is a serious customer, as is Jayden Seales, even if West Indies are nowhere near what they were; while a case for Jasprit Bumrah being rated the best of all time has been made, although he has been down on pace in the Old Trafford Test.
Where Pietersen is right, although he does not spell it out, is that the standard of finger-spin bowling in Test cricket has decreased, while that of wrist-spin has plummeted. And this is where T20 must have had its impact: spinners bowl a higher percentage of the overs in a T20 game than they do in a red-ball or Test match, but it is a different sort of spin: fired in, flat, at the batsman’s legs, denying him room. It is a distant relation of flight and dip and turn and defeating the batsman past either inside or outside edge.

The presence of finger-spinners in international cricket has faded. If the Test match is in Asia, they will have their say all right, but elsewhere? New Zealand and West Indies might not select one at home. Pakistan, to defeat England last autumn, had to dust down a couple of veterans. It is Lyon and South Africa’s Keshav Maharaj who keep this show on the road outside Asia.

Of wrist-spinners, Pietersen had to face Warne, Kumble and Mushtaq, and he might have added Yasir Shah who took five wickets per Test for Pakistan. Their successors are not visible, in England or anywhere else: India do not select Kuldeep Yadav, and while Afghanistan have Rashid Khan, they have been able to play only 11 Tests.
England have been as culpable as any country in allowing spin to decline, whether in the County Championship or the national side, and especially wrist-spin. In almost 150 years of Test cricket only one wrist-spinner has taken a hundred Test wickets for England, Doug Wright, and only one other has managed 50 wickets, Adil Rashid.
Pietersen is half-right.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think this was a stroke of genius from KP.

He’s a clever guy, he very very subtly trolls Indians.

Indians want root’s record to be diminished by saying the current bowlers are no good. But then they have to admit a lot of their current overhyped bowlers are trash too.

It’s a tough life for poor Indian fans.
This is where hypocrisy of some of my fellow Indian fans gets exposed. :yk :inti
 
Pietersen has a point

Kulsener? (a good batting all-rounder in white ball cricket only)

Both Dale Steyn and Saqlain Mushtaq deserve to be in that list ahead of some of the others..
But pitches were not really that helpful for bowlers to be honest. Angelo matthews was averaging around 52 at that time. Samaraweera was averaging 50 too. Who can forget the 624 run partnership between Sanga and Mahela. Then the whole sham of pakistan pitches where India made 410 for 1. Also he only named the good bowlers while ignoring the bad bowlers which you find in every single era. So he is not entirely honest. Indian pitches these days are toughest ever in their cricketing history. It is very hard to score runs here.
 
When you analyse in granular detail every batsman has some flaws. Even many of the so called GOATs. No player is completely perfect. When we bring in things like "difficult" pitches or "pressure" situation then it becomes highly subjective. Even today some were criticising Gill for succumbing to pressure, despite the fact that he had already scored a ton in 4th innings which is difficult to do.

There are some measures for impact, but these are mathematical models and often different from what a fan describes as "impact". As an example, despite VVS Laxman 281* being an impactful knock in the follow on test, it will pass through the filters of many fans as it didn't come abroad.
In other sports and games , there are lots of dynamic variables and factors are introduced to gauge the common model. cricket should have one or better to segregate the records per decade or that phase.they shouldn't club everything and make players go at each other
 
In other sports and games , there are lots of dynamic variables and factors are introduced to gauge the common model. cricket should have one or better to segregate the records per decade or that phase.they shouldn't club everything and make players go at each other
It is very tough to come up with when you factor in umpiring, law changes, general attitude towards the format in an era, workload. SO many intangible variables. It is better to compare players with their peers rather than someone from 50 years back.
 
It is very tough to come up with when you factor in umpiring, law changes, general attitude towards the format in an era, workload. SO many intangible variables. It is better to compare players with their peers rather than someone from 50 years back.
I like cricviz models but not sure how accurately they can get everything correct.every one will say Botham decimated Aussies (130 target) on Headingly 5th day pitch.same Botham today will cry or get obliterated on the same Headingly 5th day pitch ( this series first match where almost 400 chased with out a sweat).Definitely high time to bring some sane comparison
 
I like cricviz models but not sure how accurately they can get everything correct.every one will say Botham decimated Aussies (130 target) on Headingly 5th day pitch.same Botham today will cry or get obliterated on the same Headingly 5th day pitch ( this series first match where almost 400 chased with out a sweat).Definitely high time to bring some sane comparison
Bazball approach never happened in history. Closest is Australia in the 2000s where they would go at 4 an over thanks to guys like Haydos, Gilchrist. These guys go much faster. They load the side with batsmen and bowlers who can bat keep going harder and harder. Then they bowl relentlessly with energetic bowlers with good strategies. This methodology never was used by any team in history of cricket. So far they are more successful than they have failed.
 
Back
Top