Pietersen's men left to count the cost of failing to take full responsibility for their own actions

Nothing undermines the focus of an individual or team more than uncertainty, and in the days leading up to Saturday's Twenty20 for $20m rout England did not give the impression of a team that really wanted to be in Antigua. Once Kevin Pietersen's side realised that the country they represent was not wholly supportive of the initiative, and that a muddy sod was flying in their direction, they began searching for sympathy.

The quality of the floodlights and pitch, plus the alleged poor behaviour of Allen Stanford, the Texan billionaire bankrolling the event, were used as reasons for them having a miserable time in Antigua, a beautiful island. At one stage the players even stated that the only reason they were there was because their employers told them to be. With such an attitude it was little wonder the highly talented Stanford Superstars gave England a thumping.

Before England left, Pietersen was right to say that it would be unwise for his team, in the current economic climate, to be flash with their cash if it should win, but they and their union representatives were naïve to believe that there would not be some sort of animosity towards them. By nature, people are jealous, especially when seeing someone being given the chance to earn $1m for an evening's work.

Related articles

• Nicholas Lezard: Cricketers bowled over by hubris
• England left with a million regrets

Pietersen's troops need to realise that it is they who are responsible for their actions, not the England and Wales Cricket Board or the Professional Cricketers Association. Each of those selected can vote, have children, undertake a mortgage, drive a car, and therefore they can decide whether or not they want to partake in such an event. No player expressed reservations when the event was announced last summer.

Sean Morris, the PCA chief executive, has always held reservations about aspects of the series, but what would his reaction have been had the ECB declined Stanford's invitation. Those he represents need to realise that the amount of dirt flying around, the anxiety, and responsibility placed upon someone's shoulders is often compatible to the amount of money they earn.

Pietersen's side may not feel it at this moment but losing the match could be a blessing in disguise. Yes, after tax, they may be £350,000 out of pocket, but perhaps the defeat will spur the players on to great deeds in the next 12 months. Peter Moores, the England coach, no longer has to worry about his players losing focus and becoming cocky. Until this time next year the aim of the side will be winning Test, one-day and Twenty20 matches for England, results that could see the team lifting worthwhile trophies like the Ashes.

It will also be fascinating to see what affect the sudden arrival that such a huge sum of money has on some of the young West Indians playing for the Stanford Superstars. It must be hoped that Stanford uses his wealth management company to advise them to invest and use their money wisely.

Andre Fletcher, the 20-year-old Grenadian who scored an unbeaten 32 on Saturday evening, is a prime example. Fletcher appears a hugely talented young batsman, but how will $1m affect his attitude towards life and cricket? One of the reasons for the decline in standards of West Indian cricket is the fact that too many of the region's young players believe they have made it when they haven't.