Statistically you've been proven to be wildly off the mark. Better averages than many great all-rounders. You shouldn't allow your dislike of someone to cloud your judgement. He's steady generally so no he's not got the botham/flintoff x factor factor. But remember Flintoff was pretty abject for a couple of years, it wasn't until the last quarter of his career that he went from steady and occasional to excellence.
I base his innings on stupidly getting out at crucial times. I think anyone who has seen him will admit he has struggled to match the needs of a situation with correct action, with a good deal of luck he did that today. When you stick him together with Roy et al, it’s a disastrous line up as history keeps proving. He’s won us one game. If he can keep doing that, I’ll gladly review my opinion.
I disagree, he’s hugely overrated with bat and ball. Very good fielder though. Botham was one of our best bowlers ever in a period of greats. Flintoff sadly didn’t do his talent justice. Stokes... I think he’s making the most of what he’s got but he’s below average in my view in one of the worst periods of talent we’ve ever seen globally.
Of the players who have scored 1,000 runs and taken 100 wickets in test cricket, Stokes has the 2nd best batting average by an English player. http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/content/records/282786.html
If you keep pushing him he’ll call you a transphobic bigot for no reason and then just storm off mate, I wouldn’t want you to have that on your conscience.
Fair enough. I think I see it the other way, there's more within him to come than there is in other players in the team, he's playing with broken toys Keith Hill-style, if you get what I mean. As I said, the whole team needs a shakeup and they need to be focused on red rather than white ball cricket, I'd trust him in that side. If he can do it occasionally and average 35 while taking a few wickets when we're not focused on the ashes, what's he going to be like when we are?
England got a few big slices of luck today, there is no doubting that whatsoever but I don't care. If it helps us win the Ashes back then I'll take more of it in the last two tests. There is something about Stokes that I really like. I think he has the potential to be a great test cricketer (he's not there yet) but he does seem to be a lucky player, a kind of talisman for us - see the world cup final for another example. If he can keep winning us big matches, through luck, skill or both, then long may it continue.
Ollie Pope averages in the 70s and got a double hundred last week. Malan averages in the 50s this season. If county championship form means anything they have to be close to replacing our flops. Foakes should be close to replacing Bairstow behind the stumps so he can concentrate on his batting. I would put in Pope, Malan and Anderson for Denly, Buttler and Woakes.
I don't get this "He has to average 50 with the bat and take 350 wickets with the ball" bit. He's an all-rounder, he is there to balance the side, chip in with a few wickets with the ball as 4th seamer and be the last chance of a decent total with the bat. I mean, he bats at 5 or 6(where he should bat, for me), which means there is a good chance he will be batting with the tail, which will limit his batting average, so a 50 average is nigh on impossible for him, and bowls as 4th seamer, so the ball won't offer anywhere near as much help as it would for the opening pace attack, so 350 wickets is a bit of a pipe dream too. That's not to say that there are not better all rounders that have ever played(and got better stats) though.
On Radio 5 Live Sports Extra (Freeview 706) there's commentary on the last hour. We need 21 to win. Squeaky bum time.
The shy and retiring Bob Willis stated this morning that Stokes' innings was better than Botham's (due to the circumstances) and that he is a "world class player". But he isn't of course, according to Dannywilsonslivechild.
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/sp...d/news-story/31186b88122d506ff7894b8f0830c9c6 I don't think the Australian press have taken it well
That's odd it wasn't for me. He basically listed all the reasons Australia should be 2-0 up with the urn retained. He mentioned Harris dropped catch, waste of a review and Lyon run out fumble as the main three reasons.
