Those running English cricket felt they were taking the right course of action in February 2014, when they decided to sack Kevin Pietersen after being whitewashed 5-0 by the Australians in a truly dismal Ashes series. Management including Paul Downton, Ashley Giles ( a man who shared a crease with Pietersen as he led England to the Ashes in 2005) and James Whitaker talked then about not only re-building the team for the future but also the team ethic.
It was clear that many felt that Pietersen was still a divisive figure in the dressing room and were unwilling to put this aside for a man who is England's all-time top scorer in all formats of the game and the man who had been England's top run scorer in the aforementioned Ashes series.
It looked then as if Pietersen's England career was over. That was until incoming English and Welsh cricket board chairman Colin Graves hinted at a softening stance towards Pietersen in March this year. Pietersen was naturally buoyed by Graves's interview and decided to leave his lucrative £250,000 contract in the Indian Premier League to return to English cricket with Surrey. He believed from Graves's words that if he showed form in county cricket, he could make his way back into the England set-up.
Then the madness of this week struck. New director of English cricket Andrew Strauss told Pietersen on Monday night that he would never be selected for England again as long as he was in charge. This came hours after Pietersen had scored an incredible 326 runs in one day for Surrey (he want on to finish on an unbeaten 355 on Tuesday). England cricket fans were furious and confused at the same time.
Strauss's press conference on Tuesday didn't clear up matters at all. In one sentence, the former England captain said that there were trust issues between him and Pietersen, then in another sentence, he revealed he had offered him an advisory role with the England one-day team. How on earth can you offer a role in a team set-up to someone you have trust issues with? It left Strauss open to ridicule and criticism which he rightfully got, only days into his new role.
Some said Pietersen should have accepted Strauss's offer; that he should be looking for any route back into the set-up. With all due respect, this isn't some average player we are talking about here. This is a man who's scored 23 centuries for England and over 8,000 runs in test cricket. He's helped his side win three Ashes in the last decade as well as a Twenty 20 World Cup. He's every right to turn down an offer like that.
He's also right to feel deceived by ECB chiefs. He's gone out and scored the runs they wanted him to. Some scoff and say it was only Leicestershire. The next top scorer for Surrey in that innings was Kumar Sangakkara with 36. Pietersen's 355 was the highest score in the County Championship in the 21st century. Yet England don't feel it's right to pick him.
And that's because they don't want to admit they were wrong. Deep down they must know they have weakened the team by ditching Pietersen. If they don't then English cricket is heading in a very worrying direction. Look at the names slamming Strauss's decision this week- Michael Vaughan, Alec Stewart, Ian Botham, Shane Warne, Graeme Smith, Geoff Boycott and Sangakkara. All legends of the game who can't understand why such a talented player isn't being picked.
You might have guessed by now I'm a fan of Pietersen. As he burst onto the scene in 2005 with three centuries in a one day series against South Africa I was gripped. His 158 in the final Ashes test in 2005 which secured England's victory in the series remains one of the finest innings I've ever watched.
However, I'm not so naive that I don't accept Pietersen's made mistakes. The insulting text messages to members of the South African team in 2012 when Strauss was England captain were stupid and plain wrong. And he knows that and it's perhaps why there are still issues of trust between the pair. His book last year certainly didn't hold back either, but plenty sports stars have written controversial books and come out the other side. It's called having an opinion.
He's also thrown away his wicket on too many occasions but he's hardly the only player guilty of doing that in the world of cricket. The fact remains is that Kevin Pietersen is one of, if not the most exciting batsman in the history of English cricket and a prize wicket for every opposition bowling attack. The Aussies must be laughing that their Ashes rivals aren't going to pick a man who's just hit a triple century just because there are 'trust issues'.
The best captains and managers deal with players who are perhaps a bit unique and upset the apple cart a bit. Why were Vaughan and Duncan Fletcher able to get the best out of Pietersen in the 2005 Ashes and Peter Moores and Andy Flower unable to work with him in other Ashes series? It's undoubtedly because the former gave Pietersen the freedom to express himself on and off the field whilst the others didn't create a happy working environment, not just for Pietersen but for the whole team.
Look at Paul Gascoigne; he was a maverick and genius in the way Pietersen is to an even greater extent. Managers like Walter Smith and Terry Venables got the best out of him because they understood that he was different, whilst also understanding the huge benefits he gave to club and country. Fall-outs are also part and parcel of team sports. Do you think Sir Alex Ferguson cared that Teddy Sheringham and Andy Cole didn't speak to each other at Man Utd? Of course he didn't as they put that aside on the park and helped Fergie's club win the Treble.
If Pietersen wasn't liked by the England dressing room yet he went out and dominated the Australian bowling attack and helped England regain the Ashes this summer , would any lover of the England cricket team care? Of course they wouldn't.
People like Strauss and Cook don't want to admit they have got the Pietersen situation wrong so they are farcically sticking to their guns. Pietersen is one of those players that comes along every so often, that transcends beyond just cricketing lovers. He's like Freddie Flintoff or Ian Botham in that they are larger than life personalities, who need the right sort of management.
If there are trust issues between Strauss and Pietersen, then they should be worked out for the good of English cricket. Right now Strauss is coming across very childish; by not picking Pietersen he may even miss out on his number one target as the new England coach, Jason Gillespie, who has hinted he'd want to have Pietersen in his side.
The Pietersen situation has been allowed to develop into a fiasco but people who clearly don't have strong enough leadership skills to deal with a maverick in the dressing room, despite Pietersen still showing he has the talent to play for England.
For that and the way they've misled Pietersen, England cricket chiefs should hang their heads in shame.
