Kevin Pietersen has written a startling autobiography. So startling that it has taken the English cricketing and journalistic establishment by surprise. It is a catalogue of leaks, intrigues, triumphs and disappointments which accompanied the brightest batting talent in contemporary cricket on his way to becoming England's greatest international run scorer.
Such is the specificity and relentless ferocity of Pietersen's critical gaze, that were it not without regular glimpses into his vulnerabilities and his willingness to admit error, the book would read like an ethnographic account of the life of a cricketer in the early 21st century, and not just an autobiography. It contains critiques of the international cricketing arena in the age of the world's first commercially successful, truly international franchise based tournament. It contains an account of a foreigner trying to be accepted as an English player. It contains a glimpse into the mental make up of the instinctive batsman and the insecurities of the mind which wields that apparently carefree bat. It contains a searing critique of the institution that is the ECB and its allied institution, the media.
The reaction to the book may have led you to believe that it consists, for the most part, of two things - the dismantling of Andrew Flower's reputation as a coach, and a fierce character attack on Matthew Prior, who is politely christened 'Le Grande Fromage' (The Big Cheese). That the book is essentially a way to settle scores. It is far more than that. It is a grand attack on the corporate temperament which dominates England's cricketing establishment. The characters - Cook, Strauss, Prior, Flower, Moores, Morris, Whitaker and Downton are mere cogs in the wheel. It is, in my view, the entire point of the book that the main cast of characters in Pietersen's firing line were unwilling to behave as autonomous individuals. They were instead interested conforming, and enforcing conformity. This was the reason for their unreason in KP's eyes, and ultimately for their weakness and their betrayals.
The press was a willing toy in the hands of the powers that be. If you think about it, it is actually nearly impossible to be a cricket journalist if one takes the idea of a journalist or a reporter seriously. If a reporter is one who keeps concentrations of power under check, then this is impossible if your entire job consists of covering a monopoly. If, as a journalist, you cover many (at times mutually adversarial) institutions, then you have some leverage since you are not beholden to any one to provide you with your daily bread and butter reporting. But if your bread and butter depends on access to powerful figures in exactly one institution, then your job is effectively little different from that of a journalist in a dictatorship. You cannot possibly hold the very same people who provide you with information and keep you in the know, and might provide you with scoops, accountable for their misdeeds. It is inevitable that the press should be fractured into two camps - those sympathetic to Pietersen, and those sympathetic to the establishment.
The central failing on the part of Flower according to Pietersen seems to have been his inability to quell the clique which was developing within the England XI. This, Pietersen says was due to Flower's interest in "managing upwards" and "ticking boxes". The bowlers and the wicketkeeper formed a clique which insisted that bowlers should receive apologies from fielders every time they misfielded or dropped a catch. The members of this clique also freely abused teammates on the field when a fielding error was made, a point which was noticed by multiple opponents.
Since Pietersen's book was published, Michael Vaughan and Ricky Ponting have both suggested that what Pietersen says is plausible. The amazing thing is that the general reaction in the press seems to have been "Yes, this was a problem". As if this was some minor problem, on par with banning going out at night! This was not a problem. This was a horribly serious problem which should have been dealt with by Flower, or if not by Flower, then by Flower's bosses in the ECB. It was not. It was a problem which would have been a blockbuster story for any journalist worth his or her salt. It was a problem which should have attracted the attention of the ICC's Code of Conduct. None of these things happened.
The problems began when Duncan Fletcher resigned as coach in 2007 and Peter Moores got the job. When Vaughan quit, and Paul Collingwood followed in short order, Pietersen was made captain. Moores and Pietersen made a team with little in common and soon Pietersen told the ECB he wanted to step down and just play as a batsman because things were not working out between him and Moores. The next day, this appeared in the papers as an ultimatum - "him or me". Pietersen suggests, with reasoning which it is difficult to fault, and a degree of paranoia which is perhaps not so far out of place (going by what was to follow), that his request to the ECB was leaked as an ultimatum, so as to set the ground for sacking both Pietersen and Moores.
Boards have the right to sack captains and coaches and appoint new ones. There is nothing exceptional about that. But what Pietersen shows in the book is the ways in which confidences are breached and leaks and whispers are used to play a deadly public relations game in order to consolidate power. The thing is, unless Pietersen is entirely making this up out of thin air, it is difficult to not believe what he writes.
The book is studded with eyebrow raising revelations, such as the fact that Moores' had his players photographed in their underwear on a regular basis in order to monitor the shape of their bodies. I wonder if this is a common practice among sports teams. I wonder if this continues even today in the England squad. I cannot help but imagine what Shane Warne or Virender Sehwag might have said to this sort of demand.
But perhaps the most devastating part of the book is Pietersen's discussion of the so called 'tweetgate' and 'textgate' scandals which plagued England when South Africa toured England. Tweetgate related to a parody twitter account named "KP Genius" which was started by Richard Bailey, a friend of Stuart Broad. It later emerged that several England players were not only following the account, but also retweeted many of the tweets. Alec Stewart was told by Bailey that three England players were involved in the account. These players were Tim Bresnan, Graeme Swann and Stuart Broad. Pietersen suggests that these players were tweeting from the account. It would be worth knowing if this was indeed the case, but even the fact that the players were following this account on twitter and retweeting its tweets is enough, especially when you consider the second scandal involving Pietersen that summer. This was 'textgate'.
Textgate involved the suggestion that Pietersen had written disparaging text messages about his captain Andrew Strauss to friends in the South African Test team. It was further suggested that Pietersen passed on tactical information the the South Africans. He dismantles this suggestion most adroitly in the book simply by pointing out how ridiculous it is to think that South Africa, in today's age of video analysis, would need to ask Pietersen about dismissing the England captain.
What followed was rather brutal. The ECB ran an investigation which, according to Pietersen, involved them asking Pietersen to hand over his phone for forensic analysis! This idea was nixed by the head of the Professional Cricketers Association who pointed out that the ECB had no business prying inside Pietersen's personal phone.
In any event, Pietersen was dropped from the Lord's Test. He was later forced to go through a humiliating ritual in which he had to apologize individually to a number of England players under a process of "reintegration".
Consider this for a moment. The ECB thought that Pietersen exchanging private messages with friends in the opposition about Andrew Strauss was far worse than Pietersen's teammates retweeting disparaging jokes about him publicly. Anybody who has worked in an organization of any kind knows that 'bitching' is an integral part of the work place. A bitches to B about C, then to C about B, and probably suspects and B and C bitch about A. I wonder if the ECB asked to send the phones belonging to Broad, Strauss and Bresnan for forensic analysis.
The incidents in and of themselves are trivial, and one is left wondering why such offense was taking by both sides. How insecure does someone like Strauss have to be to get upset by something like this? Aren't these people supposed to be tough, competitive players who are used to dealing with fearsome pressures on the field? For that matter, why did Pietersen get so upset?
Here, we come to the other major story line of the book. This is the story of Pietersen's involvement in the IPL and the resentments and doubts this created in the minds of his teammates about his commitment to the England cause. Pietersen requested that he be excused from some games so he could play in the IPL. This was a problem for the ECB. Much of Pietersen's alienation from his teammates, he puts down to this fact, allied with the point about Andrew Flower being a weak man manager who did nothing to quell corrosive, abusive cliques from maturing within the squad.
All through this, Pietersen emerged as England's greatest rungetter. He was also probably England's finest limited overs batsman. He writes with great clarity about the self-doubt that comes with relying on a "see ball, hit ball" game. Sometimes, Pietersen says, he felt that everything - his stance, his balance - everything was just wrong. At other times, it would feel just right. Often, Pietersen writes, he would start an innings feeling that everything was just right, and feel, in mid-innings that things were deteriorating. He thrived on confidence, and says repeatedly in the book that he needed management which would boost his confidence. This, he writes, was at odds with what Graham Gooch and Andy Flower looked for in batsmen. Pietersen writes feelingly about his nemesis Peter Siddle, whose method of being patient and trying to wear Pietersen down by bowling a relentless line bothered the England number 4 no end.
What is particularly ironic about the ECB whining about Pietersen talking to the opposition is that England were actually the beneficiaries of such help. Pietersen writes about email exchanges he had with Rahul Dravid about playing spin bowling when he was struggling with left arm spinners for a while. Abdul Rehman of Pakistan and Shakib-al-Hasan had bothered him in 2012. By the time he came to India, he had learnt enough to hammer India at Mumbai.
Pietersen comes across as a supremely gifted, driven sportsman who left his homeland when he was 19 years old and excelled under the guidance of mentors who he regards well to this day like Clive Rice. He joined the England team when it was uncharacteristically brilliant, under the leadership of Michael Vaughan and the tactful coaching of Duncan Fletcher. Since those early years, it seemed to me from the book, it is not so much the case that Pietersen acquired interests in cricket outside England (like IPL), but that England stopped being the team in which Pietersen made his debut. This is what caused all the trouble.
The account Pietersen wants to give us is one in which England began to drift away from him ever since Peter Moores first took charge. It is interesting to see that England have doubled down on Peter Moores. This may perhaps have the effect of entrenching the coaching bureaucracy which runs the national squad even further. If this is the case, it is difficult to see how Pietersen can return to England colors. Even if he does, it is difficult to see how he will survive. I really hope he does play for England again. I think he should be picked if he can make runs for Surrey and prove his form.
The ECB has been caught napping with this. They made a desperate attempt to counter the claims in the book. A document dated September 22, 2014, containing a list of Pietersen's alleged misdemeanors was leaked (surprise!). This, as the ECB later insisted, was merely an internal document prepared by Lawyers preparing for Pietersen's book launch. It used an incorrect spelling of England captain Alastair Cook. It accused Pietersen of disobeying Andrew Flower's express instructions about not giving fodder to the Australian tabloids by going out on the town at night. Further, it accuses Pietersen of taking two young players with him. Except, that one of the 'young' players with Pietersen that night was Stuart Broad who had over 200 Test wickets to his name at the time. ECB has also been put on defense with respect to its "investigation" of the tweetgate affair.
Throughout the past year, we have heard repeatedly that the sacking of Kevin Pietersen had to do with an 'absence of trust', and not with any single smoking gun. Pietersen's account confirms the essential truth of this claim by the ECB. The ECB didn't appear to trust England's best batsman. Nor did the players, especially once Pietersen took up an IPL contract. Pietersen and Flintoff were the only two England regulars to be offered IPL contracts. The picture Pietersen paints is one of a powerful central clique of players surrounded by outsiders on the periphery. Outsiders were abused and bullied, but kept silent simply because they wanted to play for England. Pietersen himself went through a humiliating 'reintegration' ritual which he describes in the book, simply because he wanted to continue to play for England at age 32.
Amidst the anger is a sense of humour which is never more animated than when discussing the Big Cheese. Pietersen's account of Matt Prior is genuinely funny. Amidst the anger is a serious batsman who worried endlessly about his form and battled his own doubts at least as ferociously as he competed against opposing bowlers. But most importantly, amidst all the anger lies an account which, unless it is entirely a lie, is one which it is impossible to disbelieve. Pietersen's was an extremely successful career as an England batsman even though it was being ripped asunder by the many global animosities and cultural changes which cricket is going through in this era. Loyalties are being questioned along with priorities.
Pietersen found himself at the center of great ideological arguments about the nature of coaching in an age in which cricket and cricketers are being dissected statistically more than ever before, about the economics of contemporary cricket and about the forces of nationalism in a globalized age. He seems to have dealt with these disagreements the way he batted - with apparent simplicity and directness, but with an underlying dollop of ceaseless doubt and worry. It has brought him where he is today. Hopefully, just at a crossroads.
Pietersen's book has ensured that the Flower era will forever be known not as the one in which England won the Ashes thrice, but as the one in which they sacked their best batsman in a generation without giving a single reason. It has also ensured that Matt Prior will forever be associated with cheese. Andrew Strauss has said that a lot of what has happened since the release of Pietersen's book is 'madness' and could hurt English cricket. Having read the book, one can not help but feel that far from being the cause of madness, Pietersen has revealed it. For this, and for the fact that Pietersen is a genuinely brilliant batsman. I recommend that you read the book.