• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Ben Stokes

E

essex boy

Striker
Can we afford to continue carrying him? Against Australia it feels like we are playing with 10 men (Chennai would not pick him as a batsman only so why are England?). A test average of 35 is acceptable with nigh on 200 test wickets to your name but if you are not bowling that test batting average would get a lot of players dropped. In the last 9 test matches, Stokes has barely bowled (can he not have knee surgery to get the problem fixed?) and has scored one test 50. If that was Crawley or Duckett they would be dropped by now. In his last 19 test matches he has 1 test 100

His captaincy and team selections against Australia has been piss poor. There is no plan B to teeing off when sometimes you need to adjust, calling Moen back was a negative step, trying to play test cricket with no out and out quick (first test) which cost us the test and no spinner in this (so any advantage gained by Lyon being injured is lost). England by and large at home play on flat wickets so why are we not playing two out and out quicks and the leggie. Broad, Jimmy and Robinson are at least one too many of the same ilk if not two. The most ludicrous decision of this test was to have Stokes going in ahead of our most prolific batsman of the new "era" in Bairstow - what was he suppose to do with Broad at 8 who is a 10

We look like rabbits in the headlights under his leadership in this series with the skipper offering nothing to his side with the bat or ball
 

I don’t agree with the rabbits in the headlight captaincy bit. He’s a great captain. However his knee is such a worry and if he can’t bowl and it’s impacting in his batting then it’s clearly a worry
 
He’s got a lot of credit in the bank but if he’s barely able to bowl then he needs to score runs which at the moment he isn’t doing. He could easily reinvent himself as a middle order batsman only but appears to be trying to be the Bazball leader which at times means he gives his wicket away cheaply and irresponsibly.

His place will not be under threat any time soon but he could become the weak link if he continues in his current form.
 
rentaghost said:
I don’t agree with the rabbits in the headlight captaincy bit. He’s a great captain. However his knee is such a worry and if he can’t bowl and it’s impacting in his batting then it’s clearly a worry
Click to expand...

If greatness is defined as how you do against the best around he has come up way short. If you are going to tee off against the best bowling side in test cricket questions need to be asked why Bairstow is at 7 and why we have a no.10 coming in at 8. You need to pack the tail with batting to snuff out the risk of our frontline batters being picked off
 
essex boy said:
Can we afford to continue carrying him? Against Australia it feels like we are playing with 10 men (Chennai would not pick him as a batsman only so why are England?). A test average of 35 is acceptable with nigh on 200 test wickets to your name but if you are not bowling that test batting average would get a lot of players dropped. In the last 9 test matches, Stokes has barely bowled (can he not have knee surgery to get the problem fixed?) and has scored one test 50. If that was Crawley or Duckett they would be dropped by now. In his last 19 test matches he has 1 test 100

His captaincy and team selections against Australia has been piss poor. There is no plan B to teeing off when sometimes you need to adjust, calling Moen back was a negative step, trying to play test cricket with no out and out quick (first test) which cost us the test and no spinner in this (so any advantage gained by Lyon being injured is lost). England by and large at home play on flat wickets so why are we not playing two out and out quicks and the leggie. Broad, Jimmy and Robinson are at least one too many of the same ilk if not two. The most ludicrous decision of this test was to have Stokes going in ahead of our most prolific batsman of the new "era" in Bairstow - what was he suppose to do with Broad at 8 who is a 10

We look like rabbits in the headlights under his leadership in this series with the skipper offering nothing to his side with the bat or ball
Click to expand...
I disagree with most of these assertions, but, if he isn't bowling an average of 35 from this point onwards wouldn't reflect his batting talent.
A second point would be his captaincy has been amazing and the results too - until this series. Maybe Australia have looked at bazball and worked out a way to combat it and this team. If anyone/team could do it it would be the Australian who, it seems to me, have been playing bazball for donkeys.
Perhaps the biggest error was asking for flat pitches, thus throwing away much of the home advantage.
 
nowtgoodeverhappens said:
Elephant in the room stuff this
Click to expand...

Bri said:
I disagree with most of these assertions, but, if he isn't bowling an average of 35 from this point onwards wouldn't reflect his batting talent.
A second point would be his captaincy has been amazing and the results too - until this series. Maybe Australia have looked at bazball and worked out a way to combat it and this team. If anyone/team could do it it would be the Australian who, it seems to me, have been playing bazball for donkeys.
Perhaps the biggest error was asking for flat pitches, thus throwing away much of the home advantage.
Click to expand...

No issue calling for flat pitches but bizarre to then not pick a spinner of play any out and out quicks. A muddled mind does not inspire confidence to those around

Australia have put the field back to dry runs up, taken advantage of Stokes captaincy ie declaring on day 1 of first test and worked out most of our side are not use to 90mph bouncers at the head where the ball can only go in one general direction which is normally to the legside boundary square of the wicket
 
We need to pick a fully fit team, we have far too many half-fit half-crocked players and it shows.

I feel like Stokes gave us the equivalent to a new manager bounce, but we now need to find something or someone to settle us going forward.
 
PeteFTM said:
We need to pick a fully fit team, we have far too many half-fit half-crocked players and it shows.

I feel like Stokes gave us the equivalent to a new manager bounce, but we now need to find something or someone to settle us going forward.
Click to expand...

We’ve two lads around the age of 40, an all rounder captain on one leg who can’t bowl and out of Nick with the bat, a slightly immobile wicket keeper, a front line bowler who still does not properly look physically conditioned and a batsman with one shoulder
 
England need a bit of a shake up next test. Stokes is hampering us by being nowhere near fit. We can't play Anderson broad and Robinson in any test let alone the ashes.

Won't happen but I'd have stokes out for Foakes. Wood and tongue in for Anderson and Robinson.
 
PeteFTM said:
We need to pick a fully fit team, we have far too many half-fit half-crocked players and it shows.

I feel like Stokes gave us the equivalent to a new manager bounce, but we now need to find something or someone to settle us going forward.
Click to expand...
Its tricky like because the very reason we got that bounce - the lads' willingness to run through brick walls for stokes - is precisely because of that loyalty to players he has that is now hampering us
 
McGregor said:
England need a bit of a shake up next test. Stokes is hampering us by being nowhere near fit. We can't play Anderson broad and Robinson in any test let alone the ashes.

Won't happen but I'd have stokes out for Foakes. Wood and tongue in for Anderson and Robinson.
Click to expand...

Tongues already in. You're looking at Potts, Wood or Woakes to potentially replace those three.
 
essex boy said:
Can we afford to continue carrying him? Against Australia it feels like we are playing with 10 men (Chennai would not pick him as a batsman only so why are England?). A test average of 35 is acceptable with nigh on 200 test wickets to your name but if you are not bowling that test batting average would get a lot of players dropped. In the last 9 test matches, Stokes has barely bowled (can he not have knee surgery to get the problem fixed?) and has scored one test 50. If that was Crawley or Duckett they would be dropped by now. In his last 19 test matches he has 1 test 100

His captaincy and team selections against Australia has been piss poor. There is no plan B to teeing off when sometimes you need to adjust, calling Moen back was a negative step, trying to play test cricket with no out and out quick (first test) which cost us the test and no spinner in this (so any advantage gained by Lyon being injured is lost). England by and large at home play on flat wickets so why are we not playing two out and out quicks and the leggie. Broad, Jimmy and Robinson are at least one too many of the same ilk if not two. The most ludicrous decision of this test was to have Stokes going in ahead of our most prolific batsman of the new "era" in Bairstow - what was he suppose to do with Broad at 8 who is a 10

We look like rabbits in the headlights under his leadership in this series with the skipper offering nothing to his side with the bat or ball
Click to expand...
Agree with every word, but sadly the Cult of Stokes would never drop him.
 
essex boy said:
No issue calling for flat pitches but bizarre to then not pick a spinner of play any out and out quicks. A muddled mind does not inspire confidence to those around

Australia have put the field back to dry runs up, taken advantage of Stokes captaincy ie declaring on day 1 of first test and worked out most of our side are not use to 90mph bouncers at the head where the ball can only go in one general direction which is normally to the legside boundary square of the wicket
Click to expand...
There's no muddled mind and there's no confusion amongst those around him. They are 1000% committed to what the captains wants and that has resulted in some extraordinary performances and wins. Now whether that confidence is misplaced and whether or not it is good enough against the best is another argument but there is no uncertainty amongst this group of players. Some might say they are reckless etc but they certainly don't lack confidence or belief.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top