Cricket: Time Pietersen declared stance

Kevin Pietersen top scored. Photo / Getty Images

The time has come to ask Kevin Pietersen what he stands for as an England test batsman.

As England fought back and then fell over, that and other questions lingered. The England revival was overdue and worthwhile though it was some way short of redemption - and they fell well short of redemption in their second innings, bowled out for 179, setting Australia 231 to win. At stumps on the third day, Australia were 30 for none.

Pietersen is comfortably England's best run-scorer in this test, his 71 in the first innings coupled with 49 in the second. He was second to last man out, hitting out as the England tail drooped listlessly, as opposed to wagging vigorously, as Australia's had.

Australia's batsmen, put under the cosh by England's bowlers, showed how not to deal with the circumstances. But an 11th wicket stand of 40 between the gritty Brad Haddin and Nathan Lyon added vital runs in Australia's meagre 204.

Lyon showed up again in the next innings, taking five wickets as England went from four for 131 to all out 179. Pietersen played a stronger, more dedicated role in this innings but it was the memory of his dismissal in the first - and what it could have cost England - that lingered.

Their first innings had been shattered by Mitchell Johnson, 145 short of the 400 they are forever seeking and rarely attaining (just once in their past 15 tests).

Johnson was as usual irresistible against a lower order not equipped to deal with his pace and brutality. He took his tally of wickets for the series to 28, 18 of which came in four separate clutches for just 51 runs.

It was the second wicket, that of Pietersen, that cast a cloud over proceedings. Johnson had removed Tim Bresnan with a bouncer.

Pietersen pulled out of one pull shot and then essayed an ugly cross-batted hoick to a straight ball which splayed his stumps.

It was swiftly billed on one social networking site as the worst cricket stroke ever played.

It was at best the product of a confused mind. Was he wondering what was best for the team or for himself?

There was a case for playing strokes because the self-containment of the first day had gone too far. But this was less a stroke than a vainglorious heave - sod you, boys, let's get out of here.

Pietersen had spent four hours the previous day batting within himself, declining to take the attack to Australia as if he was damned if he was going to make a mistake. The result was a laborious 50

With England seven wickets down, he decided on a complete reversal of policy. It was ugly, thoughtless cricket and, although Pietersen was easily the top run-scorer in England's innings, the time has arrived when he should be asking himself (and we should be asking him) what it is he stands for as an England test batsman. At a press conference on Christmas Eve, Pietersen explained that he was pretty happy with his form but had not been able to turn starts into something of substance. But his innings have been littered with contradictory messages.

They have not been the work of a man who craves to prolong his career much beyond the week after next.

He may think he does but the way he is playing suggests something rather less than durability.

He said later he thought Johnson was about to sweep away the tail anyway so there was nothing else for it. To be fair, he was last (bats)man standing both times and, if all the England batsmen had amassed 120 runs in the two innings, the team would not be staring at a 4-0 Ashes scoreline.

But that 40-run 11th wicket stand by Haddin and Lyon and their 40 invaluable runs were a reproach to England, Pietersen and their approach.

- The Independent