Kevin Pietersen has been upset with the WTC qualification process after South Africa made it to the finals with their latest win in tests over Pakistan.
South Africa has qualified for the ICC WTC 2025 finals despite playing only 11 matches during the cycle which has stirred a debate.
On the other hand, England played 22 matches in the cycle despite winning 11 games, the highest by any team due to the way the Points Percentage is calculated.
Taking to the social media Platform X, Pietersen defended South Africa against criticism for their qualification, pointing instead at flaws in the structure of the tournament framework.
“Cricket South Africa didn’t create the FTP for their WTC qualification, so criticising them for qualification isn’t fair. You play the cards you get dealt. The qualification process is the issue and I’m sure it’s something Jay Shah will fix,” he wrote.
Cricket South Africa didn’t create the FTP for their WTF qualification, so criticising them for qualification isn’t fair. You play the cards you get dealt.
The qualification process is the issue and I’m sure it’s something @JayShah will fix.— Kevin Pietersen🦏 (@KP24) December 31, 2024
Under the current system, PCT determines standing by dividing a team’s earned points by the maximum points available from matches played.
While it incentivises consistent performance, disparities in the number of fixtures unfairly penalis team with heavier schedules.
England played twice the matches than South Africa fixtures. This broader schedule naturally exposed them to greater risk of point loss, leading to their exclusion from the final despite notable performances.
The disparity extends across the table with Australia (16 matches) and India (18 matches) rounding out the top three, while teams like Sri Lanka and Bangladesh who has only few fixtures.
Critics including pietersen argue this creates an uneven playing field and compromises the credibility of the final standings. As the June 11 final approaches, the debate over the WTC’s structure needs a urgent reform.
