🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 England v Australia 🇦🇺 2nd Ashes Test - Lords - 28th June

fazza1970 said:
Even Ponting, when he was finally done defending Carey yesterday, pointed to Stokes' average as proof that you can't judge a player based on such a linear statistic.
Virat Kohli yesterday said Stokes was the best competitor he's known/seen in cricket.
Stokes has produced truly remarkable, once-in-a-generation - not merely exceptional - performances at least four times against the world's very best at the biggest moments. He's won us a World Cup and single-handedly kept matches and series alive.
Averages? Cricket's modern-day greats know they aren't a true measure of a player.
But you obviously know better.
Click to expand...

I think Stokes is a modern day great. I think he has the ability to have been a genuine all time great but not sure he’s quite reached that level for one reason or another.

There’s something about English mavericks that stop them ever reaching the highest heights of other countries and it’s common across all sports!
 


Sea to Shining Sea said:
There’s something about English mavericks that stop them ever reaching the highest heights of other countries and it’s common across all sports!
Click to expand...

Dunno that i agree - its probably more that the media like to tear things down more than build them up. As evidenced above by what the likes of kohli and ponting etc have said about stokes
 
Twisted said:
Dunno that i agree - its probably more that the media like to tear things down more than build them up. As evidenced above by what the likes of kohli and ponting etc have said about stokes
Click to expand...

Will Stokes go down in the annals with Lara, Richards, Khan and Tendulkar though?

I think he has the natural ability and force of nature to have got to that level but won’t quite reach it. Unless he pulls off something spectacular this summer from this position and plays in another winning World Cup team. He can enter the conversation then like
 
Sea to Shining Sea said:
Will Stokes go down in the annals with Lara, Richards, Khan and Tendulkar though?

I think he has the natural ability and force of nature to have got to that level but won’t quite reach it. Unless he pulls off something spectacular this summer from this position and plays in another winning World Cup team. He can enter the conversation then like
Click to expand...

i mean.. you're naming some of the greatest to ever play the game there. that's pretty lofty expectations. i certainly think he's already cemented his place as one of the best of his generation, but as for the best across the entire history of cricket then no, that's probably too much to ask. i'm sure he'll be in the discussion as an all rounder but still not quite best of the best all time.
 
Twisted said:
i mean.. you're naming some of the greatest to ever play the game there. that's pretty lofty expectations. i certainly think he's already cemented his place as one of the best of his generation, but as for the best across the entire history of cricket then no, that's probably too much to ask. i'm sure he'll be in the discussion as an all rounder but still not quite best of the best all time.
Click to expand...

I genuinely think he has that level of ability. What he did yesterday, at Headingley and at other times of his career is special. The combination of sheer force of will, high skill level and power is Pietersen levels. Throw in his ability to do similar things with the ball and in the field makes him almost unique.

But his difficulties, personal and injury, have impacted his consistency and often across his career he has just made bad decisions on the park. I’d have him in an all time England XI I reckon but not all time World XI.
 
Sea to Shining Sea said:
I genuinely think he has that level of ability. What he did yesterday, at Headingley and at other times of his career is special. The combination of sheer force of will, high skill level and power is Pietersen levels. Throw in his ability to do similar things with the ball and in the field makes him almost unique.

But his difficulties, personal and injury, have impacted his consistency and often across his career he has just made bad decisions on the park. I’d have him in an all time England XI I reckon but not all time World XI.
Click to expand...

ok but sure, take your own argument - you think he has pietersen levels of ability? that's great. but he is also nowhere near in the discussion of all time greats.

id say yes, as an england XI because he plays in the unique position of all rounder and there's very few can compete with him for that spot. of course he's nowhere near an all time world XI, you're basically asking for the greatest all rounder that ever lived and even he wouldn't entertain the idea
 
Twisted said:
ok but sure, take your own argument - you think he has pietersen levels of ability? that's great. but he is also nowhere near in the discussion of all time greats.

id say yes, as an england XI because he plays in the unique position of all rounder and there's very few can compete with him for that spot. of course he's nowhere near an all time world XI, you're basically asking for the greatest all rounder that ever lived and even he wouldn't entertain the idea
Click to expand...

Pietersen didn’t have the bowling or fielding ability. If he had Stokes ability with ball and in field I think he would be in the conversation for all time greats. Kallis certainly is.

Maybe he wouldn’t entertain that idea. But when a batsman can do what he did yesterday, at Headingly, in Perth as a young lad on a rapid pitch with a shonky team around him, 250 in South Africa in no time at all, that’s supreme ability we’re talking about.
 
it's really hard to judge tbh because all three of stokes, flintoff and botham have had immense chaos in their career for a variety of reasons and all have had plenty of injury problems.

would botham have got in as a batsman or a bowler? yes.
would flintoff? definitely as a bowler probably as a batsman.
would stokes? i'm actually not so sure he'd get in as a bowler, but maybe that's partly down to fitness, he seems to have played have his career with one leg.
Sea to Shining Sea said:
Pietersen didn’t have the bowling or fielding ability. If he had Stokes ability with ball and in field I think he would be in the conversation for all time greats. Kallis certainly is.

Maybe he wouldn’t entertain that idea. But when a batsman can do what he did yesterday, at Headingly, in Perth as a young lad on a rapid pitch with a shonky team around him, 250 in South Africa in no time at all, that’s supreme ability we’re talking about.
Click to expand...

haway man kallis is a huge level above anyone we're talking about here, he would be in the conversation for all time greats for batting alone. the bloke was a machine.
Sea to Shining Sea said:
Pietersen didn’t have the bowling or fielding ability. If he had Stokes ability with ball and in field I think he would be in the conversation for all time greats. Kallis certainly is.

Maybe he wouldn’t entertain that idea. But when a batsman can do what he did yesterday, at Headingly, in Perth as a young lad on a rapid pitch with a shonky team around him, 250 in South Africa in no time at all, that’s supreme ability we’re talking about.
Click to expand...

i'm certainly not trying to argue that stokes, or even pietersen didn't have supreme ability. but talking about them as potentially all world all history players is just ludicrous imo.
 
Last edited:
I don't think Stokes is up there with Kallis, Kapil dev , Sobers etc.
Mitigating factors maybe injuries and at times maybe the same sort of behaviour that affected Flintoff and Botham at times.
The S.A innings , The World cup and that Innings at Headingly are as good as any of the "Great" have produced, but the level of consistency that some of these players had aren't there and I suppose thats what counts when it comes to the acid test
 
Pat Cummins still perfectly happy and doesn't see what all the fuss is about at all saying anyone who has played cricket would be fine with the dismissal. The thing is plenty of ex cricketers don't agree with it.
Does he really think this or is it the now just the easiest way for him to deal with it going forward, he describes the dismissal as a " non event ".

https://twitter.com/x/status/1676474299618836480
 
Last edited:
skullmeister said:
Pat Cummins still perfectly happy and doesn't see what all the fuss is about at all saying anyone who has played cricket would be fine with the dismissal. The thing is plenty of ex cricketers don't agree with it.
Does he really think this or is it the now just the easiest way for him to deal with it going forward, he describes the dismissal as a " non event ".

https://twitter.com/x/status/1676474299618836480
Click to expand...
I'm still under the view of my first thought was.

What the fuck have you done Jonny, I paid no heed to the Aussies in that initial moment.

It shouldn't be the story. England 184/1 capitulation should be the story and us going 2-0 down.

The implication is that we'd have won had bairstow stayed in. I reckon we'd have been all out by lunch, all it did was turn Ben into hero mode by getting him angry.

Which at the same time cost us, as they changed tack after lunch and he didn't turn off his blinkers and adapt. In the end it was all for nought.
 
skullmeister said:
Pat Cummins still perfectly happy and doesn't see what all the fuss is about at all saying anyone who has played cricket would be fine with the dismissal. The thing is plenty of ex cricketers don't agree with it.
Does he really think this or is it the now just the easiest way for him to deal with it going forward, he describes the dismissal as a " non event ".

https://twitter.com/x/status/1676474299618836480
Click to expand...
He’s a puppet told what to say by Warner and smith
 
Footage emerging of Bairstow stumping Patel in a similar manner. It wasn't the final ball of the over but nevertheless reduces Bairstow's credibility.
 
Matnab said:
I hate using the emoji laughy thing but I'm sorely tempted. Ffs the fact it was the end of the over is the whole reason why it's controversial.
Click to expand...
The Aussies will claim it wasn't the end of the over which it wasn't. Bairstow assumed it was,reasonably so.Aussies could have withdrawn the appeal when asked but wouldn't.
That's the issue for me.
Patel could equally claim that he thought the ball was dead as part of dead ball rule is " it when it is finally lodged in the wicketkeeper 's gloves".
 
Last edited:

Back
Top