KP the Capitalist is trapped in the wrong sport

Much has been written about Kevin Pietersen this week, for all that KP is someone on the edge of greatness, and the best English player of his generation - he’s clearly unhappy and a difficult character to manage. The problem is he’s a fantastic talent doomed to play the wrong sport.

One of the things that makes cricket unique is that it’s essentially an individual’s sport played by teams. Like no other team game, personal contributions are there to be analysed and judged in black and white, runs and wickets are the only currency that matters and the scorecard never lies.

Consider rugby and football, our two other dominant team sports, in the Six Nations tournament just finished, 53% of the points scored came from the boots of the elected place kickers, but the opportunities for Ronan O’Gara or Toby Flood to score only came from another member of the team crossing for a try, or teammates forcing an error from the opposition and winning a penalty within kicking distance. Yes, kickers do get their fair share of glamour, but some of the most celebrated of all players barely scored a point for their country.

Martin Johnson is one of the greatest sportsmen England has produced in any discipline, and yet in 92 tests for England and the Lions he scored only two tries – a paltry ten points – but we all appreciate what Johnno brought to the cause.

Rugby’s probably the ultimate team sport; the best teams attack and defend as a collective. One man comes up with the ball when a pack drives over the try line, but it’s the collective effort, will and strength of the group that’s responsible for the score – not to mention those involved in the previous phases of the move that earned the territorial advantage in the first place. There’s nothing equivalent in cricket – sure occasionally a fielder will pull off a sensational catch to gift a bowler a wicket – but essentially you’re on your own.

Ideologically speaking rugby is the Communist sport – a fantastic irony that the stockbrokers, bankers and farmers that play the game will surely appreciate. Which makes individual games like golf or tennis Capitalism, where the success of the victors can only be achieved at the expense of others. Cricket falls somewhere in the middle; maybe its New Labours fabled ‘the third way’ - but let’s hope not.

Similarly in football, games are won and lost on goals scored, and although strikers are generally the highest paid and most celebrated individuals on a team, they’d struggle to function without the support of the rest of a team. And no-one doubts the contributions of defensive players like Nemanja Vidic or Claude Makelele for example – although it’s only in recent years that the Carling Opta boffins have started collating statistics on tackle or passing percentages, to ‘rate’ their performances. Anyone who was watched players such as these, or those like Fabregas and Xaxi for Arsenal and Barcelona respectively will appreciate their game offers so much more to the side than the scorebook reveals, the heartbeat of the team they dictate the style, pace and movement of the collective.

So back to KP’s, he is fantastically dedicated to cricket, and to squeezing every last drop reward out of his physical ability. By all accounts he practises harder than anyone else, improving his own game and pushing it to new heights – the addition of the switch hit to his repertoire being a perfect example.

So as an individual within the England team he delivers to a remarkable degree, but after that I think he struggles. He clearly gets frustrated by the limitations of those around him who aren’t as dedicated, single minded or talented as he is. Throughout Pietersen’s career he’s consistently moved on to pursue his goals, from leaving South Africa behind and moving to Nottinghamshire to fulfil his ambitions, to ditching Notts in favour of his buddy Warne and the money offered by Hampshire, and then more recently manoeuvring to have Peter Moores replaced as England coach. He lets nothing or nobody get in the way of his individual success. Only now he’s reached the pinnacle there’s nowhere to go, nothing to rail against.

In this respect Pietersen would be much more suited to an individual sport like golf. He reminds me hugely of Tiger Woods or Nick Faldo; displaying absolute dedication to mind, body and technique to attain the greatest heights; not bothered about upsetting people on the way to achieve their goals; absolutely unafraid of speaking their mind to rivals or the press; and not great team players – witness Tiger’s relative struggle in the team restrictions of the Ryder Cup (although curiously not for Faldo at least as a player).

It’s that individual format that would allow Pietersen to flourish, reliant solely on himself rather than having anyone else to rely on or hold him back, although at least cricket still affords him the opportunity for the individual glory and personal records that he craves.