Autobiography in focus - Will Kevin Pietersen be immune from ECB backlash if book reveals too much?
Kevin Pietersen’s upcoming book titled KP: The Autobiography, which releases on October 9, may lead to another showdown between the sacked cricketer and England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB).
Pietersen had been ejected from the England team in February earlier this year after England’s disastrous 5-0 defeat in the Ashes Down Under. Painted as a negative influence on the team during the Ashes series, ECB managing director Paul Downton claimed that there was a “unanimous feeling” within the England team that the time had come to move on from Pietersen.
Even though Pietersen had been discarded permanently, his central contract with the ECB ran till the end of September, as a result of which he had to adhere to the confidentiality agreement between himself and the board. But his confidentiality agreement expired on October 1, and he is now free to reveal the details of his sacking in addition to his side of the story on what went on during the Ashes last year among other things. With his book coming out next week, the ‘revelations’, if any, may irk the national board.
Contracted with Surrey since 2010, Pietersen’s contract ended on August 30 and his registration has been cancelled at the county, apparently making him ‘immune’ from any possible ECB backlash. Pietersen may well return to play county cricket, but it’s a move which will be surrounded by many complexities.
Here’s what he tweeted recently:
ECB may worry about what Pietersen reveals in his book, as it may lead to ill feelings in the England dressing room.
What can ECB do?
The fact that Surrey have not included him in their list of retained players for the 2015 season has also led to reports that the ECB can’t take any disciplinary action against the 34-year old, as he is no longer registered to a county or body affiliated with the board.
There is no clarity on the matter, however, with the ECB, on the contrary, stating that they maintain the right to take action against any breaches of confidentiality. According to the board, the central contracts that Pietersen had signed with the board right from 2005 till the end of his England career had all began with a clause guaranteeing confidentiality not just during the term of his contracts but also after.
What there is clarity on, though, is that Pietersen, following his Surrey release, does not have to seek the ECB’s permission in regards to playing in the Indian Premier League (IPL) or Big Bash League (BBL) in Australia, which could have been denied depending on revelations in his book. He has signed a 2-year contract with Melbourne Stars to play in the BBL and is also likely to return for Delhi Daredevils in the IPL next year.
Surrey release
As far as Surrey excluding him from their retained list is concerned, it is hardly a surprise considering the fact that he has been a freelancer ever since being discarded from the England set-up. He played only T20 cricket for the county in the just concluded season and had long gaps between games, consequently being unable to live up to his reputation as he averaged just 22.50 over 12 games. He, himself, recently acknowledged a need to play four-day cricket next season if he is to improve on his performances in the shortest format.
Although Surrey are understood to be keen in having Pietersen feature in England’s T20 competition next season as well, the fee that they can afford to pay might prove a stumbling block as he is no longer exempt from the county cricket salary cap of around £2m. The fact that the South African-born right-hander was responsible for around 20% of ticket sales in the Natwest T20 Blast this year suggests that he is worth being paid that sum of money, but the county will also have to factor in him being away for the early part of the season due to IPL commitments.
Whatever decision Surrey do decide to take will have to be taken quickly, as other counties are now free to lure Pietersen after his release from Surrey.