What's new

Is Ben Stokes the most overrated cricketer currently? Deep dive into his stats

MMHS said:
Check this -

http://www.espncricinfo.com/england/content/player/9310.html

There was genuine discussion if Bresnan can reach the level of Kapil or not. He faded away, because of fitness & distorted focus - he was part of 13 consecutive Test wins (his first Test) & at one point, probably after 10 Tests, he has a batting average over 40, bowling average under 25.
Click to expand...


Yes he fell away because of those factors which showed he didn't have the mentality to be as good as you claim.
 
MMHS said:
But, to be fair to everyone criticizing him, you have to see it other way as well.

Biggest weakness of Stokes is that he is just not good enough bowler to make any impact. 1/2 wickets here & there every innings isn't what you want from your all rounder. You can say that he is impactful - but blasting one innings in a series (his average of <33 indicates his consistency level) doesn't make him much impactful either.

To me, anyone to be considered as match winner as all-rounder has to do it with ball, otherwise he needs to bat like Sobers, Kallis or at least Tony Greig - that's average of 40+ so that he can make the team as batsman. Stokes is super hyped & current Pom head coach picks players on their SR - which is fine for LO format, but don't think Stokes should be even considered as decent Test all rounder.

I think, this hype won't last long, unless he can take his batting average over 40 or bring bowling average around 30. At present, he is comfortably 3rd best Test all rounder even in ENG team after Moeen & Woakes - 4th, if you consider Jhonny as an all-rounder (which he is to me - serving 2 purpose for the team & can make starting XI for either).

Any given day, I'll pick Phillandar over Stokes in my Test team - almost everywhere across globe, and adjust other spots for combination (that's I'll drop one bowler to pick a batsman, who can average 35+). Some of the names he is associated with, just look back by 26/27 where they were standing in their Test team. You ask me - 5/6 years back, Tim Bresnan was comfortably a better Test all-round potential than Stokes is now at similar age.

He is a gun ODI/T20 player, hence his price at IPL indicates that, but in Test, just not good enough for the status he is given.
Click to expand...

IMO Stokes needs to get in the side for his batting and for that to happen he needs to be averaging 40 at best. If he can do that and average say around 30-35 with the ball he'll be justifying his position in the side. Currently he's not and it's unfortunate that everyone seems to think he'll come good but how can he come good if he doesn't seem to know what's his best suit is?

Looking back, Kallis got in the side for his batting and the bowling was a bonus. Same as Pollock. His batting was a bonus. At the moment Stokes doesn't have any suit that he Excells at yet he's batting at 6. You expect your number 6 batsmen to at least average around 40.
 
Dark Magician said:
IMO Stokes needs to get in the side for his batting and for that to happen he needs to be averaging 40 at best. If he can do that and average say around 30-35 with the ball he'll be justifying his position in the side. Currently he's not and it's unfortunate that everyone seems to think he'll come good but how can he come good if he doesn't seem to know what's his best suit is?

Looking back, Kallis got in the side for his batting and the bowling was a bonus. Same as Pollock. His batting was a bonus. At the moment Stokes doesn't have any suit that he Excells at yet he's batting at 6. You expect your number 6 batsmen to at least average around 40.
Click to expand...

I think the opposite, I think Stokes should focus more on his bowling which is getting more use than his batting these days. With Moeen taking the premier spinner spot, no need to play a specialist spinner so Moeen can bat at 7, Stokes at 8. I think Stokes is probably England's fourth best fast bowler anyway after Broad, Anderson and Woakes, and Woakes can bat, so could stick with him.
 
Hasan123 said:
Yes he fell away because of those factors which showed he didn't have the mentality to be as good as you claim.
Click to expand...

If you read the 2 posts just above, you should get your clue - 2 people, well aware of cricket are confused with Stokes potential & role. THAT ONLY HAPPENS, WHEN YOU ARE A BITS & PIECES PLAYER.

Theoretically, one should look to average like 48 with bat & 19 with ball to be an all-rounder supreme & you should have a bit leadership skills as well to lead your team or at least one core discipline (roughly, that was was Imran for 1980s) - then you start to move around positive or negative in either discipline, keeping at least one in acceptable range for an automatic selection, without the other.

At present, Stokes is neither & we are not sure either which way he can be better. I am not pulling him down - but many posters use world class word for him, which is gross over statement. Tell me, why he is better than Glen Maxwell as a Test all-rounder - if Maxi plays most of his Tests in drier surface, he'll match Stokes bowling figures & equally destructive batsman. Or take Afridi - similar bowling, more destructive batting - where do you put Afridi as Test all-rounder? For a record, Afridi had a Test 5for (& a 3for) & a match winning 141 in his 1st 2 Tests, against 2 toughest opponents - AUS of late 90s & IND in IND.

Ben Stokes has long, long, long way to run .... and his time is running out first for a 26 years old all-rounder, to be World Class.
 
Last edited:
2016 was a good year for Stokes. He averaged 45 with bat and 26 with ball. If he can maintain a batting average close to 40 and a bowling average under 30 for another 5 years, he will be among the top all-rounders.
 
MMHS said:
If you read the 2 posts just above, you should get your clue - 2 people, well aware of cricket are confused with Stokes potential & role. THAT ONLY HAPPENS, WHEN YOU ARE A BITS & PIECES PLAYER.

Theoretically, one should look to average like 48 with bat & 19 with ball to be an all-rounder supreme & you should have a bit leadership skills as well to lead your team or at least one core discipline (roughly, that was was Imran for 1980s) - then you start to move around positive or negative in either discipline, keeping at least one in acceptable range for an automatic selection, without the other.

At present, Stokes is neither & we are not sure either which way he can be better. I am not pulling him down - but many posters use world class word for him, which is gross over statement. Tell me, why he is better than Glen Maxwell as a Test all-rounder - if Maxi plays most of his Tests in drier surface, he'll match Stokes bowling figures & equally destructive batsman. Or take Afridi - similar bowling, more destructive batting - where do you put Afridi as Test all-rounder? For a record, Afridi had a Test 5for (& a 3for) & a match winning 141 in his 1st 2 Tests, against 2 toughest opponents - AUS of late 90s & IND in IND.

Ben Stokes has long, long, long way to run .... and his time is running out first for a 26 years old all-rounder, to be World Class.
Click to expand...

I have to pull you up on this.

A bits and pieces player doesn't score a 90 with the team in a precarious position (30-4) and then follows it up with the fastest 100 seen at the ground (and the fastest test 100 for Eng in over 113 years) in the 2nd inns for good measure (Lords 2015)

A bits and pieces player doesn't score one of the most destructive test inns seen in modern times (250 vs SA)

A bits and pieces cricketer doesn't score a ton in only his 2nd test at the WACA (2013) against a guy like Mitch Johnson who had been terrorising England all throughout that series.

He has been injured on and off recently too so I wouldn't look too deeply into recent performances. He is an impact player for sure, and needs a good base set by the batsmen before him to really take the game away from the opposition. Coming into bat with the team under a 100 for 4 down, isn't going to be the best platform for an aggressive batsman like him. He isn't your Misbah type who is going to block away for an hour to in an attempt to tire the bowlers.

His bowling could do with more bite at the moment (seems to have gone down hill slightly but that could be injury related). I think 4th seamer is just about right for him at the moment. Batting wise he could drop down to no 7 with a faltering top order but with a reliable one churning out scores of 250-4, he would be the just the ticket to come in at no 6 and take the game away.
 
On_the_up said:
I have to pull you up on this.

A bits and pieces player doesn't score a 90 with the team in a precarious position (30-4) and then follows it up with the fastest 100 seen at the ground (and the fastest test 100 for Eng in over 113 years) in the 2nd inns for good measure (Lords 2015)

A bits and pieces player doesn't score one of the most destructive test inns seen in modern times (250 vs SA)

A bits and pieces cricketer doesn't score a ton in only his 2nd test at the WACA (2013) against a guy like Mitch Johnson who had been terrorising England all throughout that series.

He has been injured on and off recently too so I wouldn't look too deeply into recent performances. He is an impact player for sure, and needs a good base set by the batsmen before him to really take the game away from the opposition. Coming into bat with the team under a 100 for 4 down, isn't going to be the best platform for an aggressive batsman like him. He isn't your Misbah type who is going to block away for an hour to in an attempt to tire the bowlers.

His bowling could do with more bite at the moment (seems to have gone down hill slightly but that could be injury related). I think 4th seamer is just about right for him at the moment. Batting wise he could drop down to no 7 with a faltering top order but with a reliable one churning out scores of 250-4, he would be the just the ticket to come in at no 6 and take the game away.
Click to expand...

Every thing that you wrote in this post of yours are actually covered in my one liner, if you have missed just in case. That 141 at Chennai is more that entire batting career of Ben Stokes - if you haven't seen that, ask senior PP posters here, they'll tell you. In recent times, an Aussie all-rounder (forgot name),score 170+ to take his team within a shot of chasing 280+, from 70 for 6 or so.

And for bowling - ask him to match ever, the effort of a Leggi on Day 1 of Karachi Test - 5 for 50 or so, on debut against a lineup that top 6 reads Mark Taylor, Michel Slater, Justin Langer, Mark Waugh, Steve Waugh & Darren Lehman. Marcus North has a Test 6 for, and Michel Bevan a match 10for ...... next time you have to come with bit better preparation than cherry picking data, if you really want to pull me up.
 
MMHS said:
Every thing that you wrote in this post of yours are actually covered in my one liner, if you have missed just in case. That 141 at Chennai is more that entire batting career of Ben Stokes - if you haven't seen that, ask senior PP posters here, they'll tell you. In recent times, an Aussie all-rounder (forgot name),score 170+ to take his team within a shot of chasing 280+, from 70 for 6 or so.

And for bowling - ask him to match ever, the effort of a Leggi on Day 1 of Karachi Test - 5 for 50 or so, on debut against a lineup that top 6 reads Mark Taylor, Michel Slater, Justin Langer, Mark Waugh, Steve Waugh & Darren Lehman. Marcus North has a Test 6 for, and Michel Bevan a match 10for ...... next time you have to come with bit better preparation than cherry picking data, if you really want to pull me up.
Click to expand...

That's a kop out if I ever saw one. One inns being better than the whole career. Azhar Mahmood started off looking like a world beater scoring 100s in 3 out his first 4 tests againt SAfrica but just about finished with avg of 30.

Are you saying Afridi is a better test all rounder than Stokes? His averages were going downhill fast, had he played any more, he would be averaging under 30 with the bat and over 40 with the ball.

In that Karachi test he only took 3 top order wkts (and that probably because they hadn't seen him before), he failed to take a wkt in the 2nd inns and never took a fifer in the rest of his 27 match test career.
 
On_the_up said:
That's a kop out if I ever saw one. One inns being better than the whole career. Azhar Mahmood started off looking like a world beater scoring 100s in 3 out his first 4 tests againt SAfrica but just about finished with avg of 30.

Are you saying Afridi is a better test all rounder than Stokes? His averages were going downhill fast, had he played any more, he would be averaging under 30 with the bat and over 40 with the ball.

In that Karachi test he only took 3 top order wkts (and that probably because they hadn't seen him before), he failed to take a wkt in the 2nd inns and never took a fifer in the rest of his 27 match test career.
Click to expand...

No, I am saying there is a big gap between Stokes & a World class all-rounder. You can put all rounders in 3 broad category - bowling all rounders who makes the team as bowler & world class of them are among team's top bowlers, but they are capable of contributing with bat; batting all rounders are opposite- world class of those are like Steve Waugh or Sanath Jays. Rest are balanced all rounders - both good with bat & ball - world class of those can make the team either as as batsman or bowler; ATGs can win match with both - other side are bits & pieces - can't make team on either, but as a package does give a good balance to the team - and they are good as well with either in patches.

Here the question is being Ben Stokes as World class Test all-rounder, to some best in world now which is a bit overstatement. Those whom we know as world class all rounders actually had their mark by 26, those who were ATG actually were among top bowler or batsmen in contemporary world by 26. As of now, Ben Stokes is potential only - depending on his next 4/5 years - he'll end as bits & pieces, World class or ATG.

Afridi & Mahmood was exactly such at 25, sadly they didn't end, so ended as bits & pieces - you are comparing retired cricketer Afridi vs potential Stokes - go back to 2003 or 1999, then compare the then Afridi, Mahmood vs recent Stokes. Some people has the problem of comparing present Stokes as per his future potential vs Ian Botham or Kapil Dev after their 20 years career - I am trying to pull their rush a bit.
 
Yes what you said there I cannot disagree with.

I wasn't claiming Stokes to be in the top category of all rounders.

I was querying classifying him as a bits and pieces cricketer, which to me is a derogatory term, someone who's neither here nor there, a poor man's all rounder if you wish, the best of a bad bunch. A player who's never going to pull up any trees but will do an honest job.

I think he is definitely better than that.
 
On_the_up said:
Yes what you said there I cannot disagree with.

I wasn't claiming Stokes to be in the top category of all rounders.

I was querying classifying him as a bits and pieces cricketer, which to me is a derogatory term, someone who's neither here nor there, a poor man's all rounder if you wish, the best of a bad bunch. A player who's never going to pull up any trees but will do an honest job.

I think he is definitely better than that.
Click to expand...

i agree. he is not performing well in tests at the moment but people are being too critical. he is a match winner and a destructive player. certainly among the best all rounders in the world and i would say he is world class. expecting him to bounce back soon.
 
He does a job for england as a 4th seamer, but his batting hasnt been consistant enough to be batting in top 6 in current test side, yes hes got some good 100s but otherwises hes been pretty woeful with bat in hand.
 
He is a good player, however his role is undefined. He's known as an "impact player"...I guess you can call him an in form Afridi. Shakib, Ashwin, Philander and his countrymen Moeen and even Woakes are all superior allrounders.
 
Haz95 said:
He is a good player, however his role is undefined. He's known as an "impact player"...I guess you can call him an in form Afridi. Shakib, Ashwin, Philander and his countrymen Moeen and even Woakes are all superior allrounders.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say so. Woakes is the best bowler of the three but I have yet to see him make a test hundred, let alone one against a fired-up Johnno & Rhino.
 
Robert said:
I wouldn't say so. Woakes is the best bowler of the three but I have yet to see him make a test hundred, let alone one against a fired-up Johnno & Rhino.
Click to expand...
I say that probably due to the fact that Woakes is the type of allrounder I'd prefer most in my team...a genuine bowler who can also make some good batting scores. Stokes has better feats than all his teammates, including Moeen but his lack of consistency really ruins it for him.

It's a tricky one for me...Stokes sometimes is Botham 2.0 but sometimes is also Anwar Ali 2.0.
 
[MENTION=46929]shaz619[/MENTION] ,Stokes the future Botham getting a wicket and a century :P
 
ads101 said:
I think the opposite, I think Stokes should focus more on his bowling which is getting more use than his batting these days. With Moeen taking the premier spinner spot, no need to play a specialist spinner so Moeen can bat at 7, Stokes at 8. I think Stokes is probably England's fourth best fast bowler anyway after Broad, Anderson and Woakes, and Woakes can bat, so could stick with him.
Click to expand...

A man who can bat like that at #8???

England have three #6s in one team. If they take the gloves from Bairstow I would put him at #5.
 
Stokes at #8 ?? He played quite briskly today from #6 and still almost missed out on his ton. #6 is the absolutely perfect position for an innings-turning player like Stokes.

Today is probably the best he has played for England.
 
I think England need to find the right position for all their batsmen. Once that happens they'll be real strong. And that also means Stokes playing at 6.
 
Jonathan Agnew:

"At The Oval we saw all of Stokes, who only really opened his shoulders when he was joined by last man James Anderson.

If you take into consideration that he can be a correct batsman, an annihilator, a pace bowler and a wonderful fielder, then he is really is four cricketers in one."

:facepalm:
 
Robert said:
I wouldn't say so. Woakes is the best bowler of the three but I have yet to see him make a test hundred, let alone one against a fired-up Johnno & Rhino.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The mere fact that he scored a hundred in that series has written his name in history books.
 
Stokes isn't in the team based on either skill. He's an ODI Darren Sammy for Tests.
 
Lefthanded said:
Stokes isn't in the team based on either skill. He's an ODI Darren Sammy for Tests.
Click to expand...

Five centuries in 35 tests including a 250. He's clearly a test-class batter. Just needs more consistency. He is learning - the century in this test was well controlled.
 
Lefthanded said:
Stokes isn't in the team based on either skill. He's an ODI Darren Sammy for Tests.
Click to expand...

Ridiculous comment. Stokes already has as many five wicket hauls and centuries as Flintoff got in his whole career. In Test Cricket no less!
 
Haha, that's fair.

I was intentionally making an exaggerated absurd statement.

Still, already being more successful than Flintoff isn't a measure of his actual skill and whether or not he's over-rated. Surely both can be over-rated?

As I said, he's just not good enough to get into a team based on either skill.

He's entered this 35th Test averaging 33 with bat & 35 with ball.

Is that #6 material, or among the three best seamers in England?

He's a 4th seamer, his batting average more like a handy #8 in a side where the wicket-keeper is a proper batsman.

England rely on their wicketkeeper to bat at 5. He's a proper all rounder.

If England had another middle order batsman, wouldn't Moeen be ahead of him because he's the best spinner in England? Moeen has played more crucial knocks than Stokes, while batting with the tail from #7 & 8?

People say that England have too many #6 batsmen. The reality is that they have too many #7s, and one is the best spinner in the country.
 
Ben Stokes - Most overrated player in world cricket?

Alot of people these days, especially the English can't seem to get enough of Stokesy. Everytime he picks up a few wickets or hits a couple of sixes you see articles popping up about how he's the greatest thing to happen to English cricket recently. When in reality, he cost England the T20 World Cup in 2016, made a hero of a mediocre player like Carlos Braithwaite and couldn't hit a single boundary off 64 balls in the semi-final of the Champions Trophy. Yes, he's a good player. That's evident by the one truly great innings he played in South Africa but he rarely steps up in pressure situations. The most recent example -- the second test at Trent Bridge. And he's just not that good.

In many respects, he's very much like Andrew Flintoff who was similarly overrated. But atleast he came to the fore at one of English cricket's most important moments in 2005.

Maybe it's because world cricket produces so few great all-rounders these days and maybe Stokes will develop into a great all-rounder in the future. But for now, people, especially the English need to stop hyping the hell out of him.
 
In test cricket, he is well on his way to becoming a great all rounder. Has won games by performing with both bat and ball simultaneously like Botham.

Has not fulfilled his potential yet in LoIs but in tests, he deserves the hype and is in no way overrated.
 
ppers and their obsession of proving that stokes is overrated yet he continues to win matches for england :))
 
KhalidRafi said:
Maybe it's because world cricket produces so few great all-rounders these days and maybe Stokes will develop into a great all-rounder in the future. But for now, people, especially the English need [/] to stop hyping the hell out of him.
Click to expand...


Please don't confuse our needs with your own wants ;-)

Stokesy got a pressure-on hundred in the last match, as well as putting in an aggressive spell which took two wickets at a crucial period in the fourth innings.

He seems to get more effective when he is wound up, and the England team is finding ways to keep him wound up more of the time.
 
Stokes is not overrated he is best fast bowling allrounder in the world currently and the work he have to do for his team with both batting and bowling is extra ordinary.
 
Last edited:
Every second day we have a thread on him being overrated.

After Smith he is the second best Test player in the world these days.
 
I would definitely agree that he is the most overrated at the moment. If he was not English (or Australian), nobody would notice him.
 
Most teams would take him in there team right now, actually I can't think of a country who wouldn't want him in their team.
 
Nobody would notice him?

- Scored a century against a rampaging Mitchell Johnson, Ryan Harris et al at the WACA in just his 2nd test.
- Fastest Test hundred at Lord's
- Fastest Test 250
- 2 six-for's against Australia

I find him to be utterly dislikable on the field, and his stats are nothing special, but they are trending in the right direction. Not too long ago he was averaging around 25 with the bat and 40 with the ball in Tests. He now averages 34 with both bat and ball, not to mention that he is one of the very top fielders in world cricket.

Stokes has tremendous natural ability. The only thing missing is consistency. If he finds that, he'd end up an almost certain ATG. Right now, he is on track to "only" be the best A/R of his generation.
 
shane said:
It's not. Everyone knows that the media in those countries, more than others, blows individual success well out of proportion.
Click to expand...

I disagree. The British, at least, are very self-effacing, and critical of their heroes. It's simply not the acceptable thing to do well here.
 
His overall stats may reveal a slight lack of consistency, but you have to respect him as a cricketer for repeatedly bringing his A game against top teams like South Africa, instead of padding his stats against minnows like certain all-rounders who may appear to have superior stats unless you analyse the context behind them. :hafeez
 
Last edited:
Tell me a better fast bowling all rounder than Stokes at the moment and you can't, cos there isn't one.
 
shane said:
It's not. Everyone knows that the media in those countries, more than others, blows individual success well out of proportion.
Click to expand...

You said that Stokes would not be rated if he was not English or Australian, which is nonsense. He is doing extremely well as an impact all-rounder at the moment, regardless of who he plays for. All-rounders from all countries have always been rated amongst cricket fans.
 
This deep dive was straight into an ocean of humble pies.
 
idrizzy said:
Tell me a better fast bowling all rounder than Stokes at the moment and you can't, cos there isn't one.
Click to expand...

Depends. If you are looking for a bowling all-rounder there are better options.
 
Another great innings. A hundred out of a total of 258.

He is the second best test player in the world behind Smith these days (and before the return of Steyn).
 
MMHS said:
If you read the 2 posts just above, you should get your clue - 2 people, well aware of cricket are confused with Stokes potential & role. THAT ONLY HAPPENS, WHEN YOU ARE A BITS & PIECES PLAYER.

Theoretically, one should look to average like 48 with bat & 19 with ball to be an all-rounder supreme


Ben Stokes has long, long, long way to run .... and his time is running out first for a 26 years old all-rounder, to be World Class.
Click to expand...

Nobody has ever achieved such stats.

Stokes is quite clearly good enough to play for England purely as a batter, and I think he should concentrate on that.
 
Robert said:
Nobody has ever achieved such stats.

Stokes is quite clearly good enough to play for England purely as a batter, and I think he should concentrate on that.
Click to expand...

I categorically put those numbers, because that was Imran Khan in 1980s - for 10 years; otherwise easy to put numbers like 50/25 or 50/20 or 40/20 .......

He definitely can play as a batsman, but that probably doesn't make him a world class all-rounder.
 
Best all-rounder to play for England since Botham.

Does not have enough natural talent or monumental impact to be as good as The Beef, mostly evident by the fact that he is always nursing his knee and so could not get away with being lazy / unfit / old whilst still performing to a world-class standard like Beef did.

But Stokes certainly stands out in this era as a top talismanic all-rounder that (given some personal match-fitness and the right mood in the ground) can turn a Test on its head very quickly. For the statistician types BTW, his numbers are getting stronger with every series.
 
MMHS said:
I categorically put those numbers, because that was Imran Khan in 1980s - for 10 years; otherwise easy to put numbers like 50/25 or 50/20 or 40/20 .......

He definitely can play as a batsman, but that probably doesn't make him a world class all-rounder.
Click to expand...

This again? I just laugh when I hear people talking about Imran averaging fifty like he was Richards or Border. I saw a lot of all three and he wasn't. It isn't even true - he averaged 44 in the eighties, with five centuries, and one not out every four innings. That's a lot of red ink to boost his average. He was a great fast bowler and an average test batter. Which is still extremely impressive. But Stokes already has more centuries than Imran in half the tests and is a better batsman than Imran ever was.
 
Robert said:
This again? I just laugh when I hear people talking about Imran averaging fifty like he was Richards or Border. I saw a lot of all three and he wasn't. It isn't even true - he averaged 44 in the eighties, with five centuries, and one not out every four innings. That's a lot of red ink to boost his average. He was a great fast bowler and an average test batter. Which is still extremely impressive. But Stokes already has more centuries than Imran in half the tests and is a better batsman than Imran ever was.
Click to expand...

You laughed it last time as well, when I gave the explanation & didn't return. Since, it's about Ben Stokes & you brought Imran in that, it took me longer to finish my laugh. Now, as I explained last time - in 1980s, there are in total 12 players who has scored more than 2430 runs in the decade with an average higher than Imran, who scored 2430, and this is average sort on volume. I hope you won't laugh this time if you know what it means.

I missed that 48 average because somewhere I calculated the best 10 years of a career (not calendar decade), so yes it's not 48, 44 with 6 hundreds (not 5) in 1980. Coming to Imran's not out theory, I explained that few times, one for the last time - out of his 19 Not Outs in 71, 15 were batting at 6 or 7 which indicates more of run out of partner than being selfish. I would rather say, he missed out lots of scoring chance because of failure of his partners to support him.

Your last comment regarding Ben Stokes the batsman & "Imran ever was", I am not sure even if I should laugh at that or not. For his last 9 years of career between 1982 to 1991, for 52 Tests, Imran averages 51.34 with 5 hundreds & 15, 50+ scores - and that's in 1980s, without any free lunch (in fact his average against SRL is lowest 30) - Ben Stokes will have to run many, many miles to reach half that level for best part of 10 years, if he is to make it above Imran as a batsman; and if I bring bowling into it, you'll laugh again.

This thread is about Ben Stokes and most over rated cricketer - which I don't think he is, rather he is quite decent prospect to become border line great. If you count on his batting only, I have to say it's bang average as specialist bat, but he is a very good utility cricketer, along with his bowling as 5th bowler. But, for Ben Stokes, the all-rounder, if you bring Imran, Botham in that, I have to say the the title of this thread isn't that far. Tell me, after 37 Tests & being in batting purple patch for over a year or two, still his batting average is behind bowling average - why this guy should be rated higher than Ravi Shastri? This guy'll lose his England spot if he has just 6 months bad patch with bat.
 
MMHS said:
You laughed it last time as well, when I gave the explanation & didn't return. Since, it's about Ben Stokes & you brought Imran in that, it took me longer to finish my laugh. Now, as I explained last time - in 1980s, there are in total 12 players who has scored more than 2430 runs in the decade with an average higher than Imran, who scored 2430, and this is average sort on volume. I hope you won't laugh this time if you know what it means.

I missed that 48 average because somewhere I calculated the best 10 years of a career (not calendar decade), so yes it's not 48, 44 with 6 hundreds (not 5) in 1980. Coming to Imran's not out theory, I explained that few times, one for the last time - out of his 19 Not Outs in 71, 15 were batting at 6 or 7 which indicates more of run out of partner than being selfish. I would rather say, he missed out lots of scoring chance because of failure of his partners to support him.

Your last comment regarding Ben Stokes the batsman & "Imran ever was", I am not sure even if I should laugh at that or not. For his last 9 years of career between 1982 to 1991, for 52 Tests, Imran averages 51.34 with 5 hundreds & 15, 50+ scores - and that's in 1980s, without any free lunch (in fact his average against SRL is lowest 30) - Ben Stokes will have to run many, many miles to reach half that level for best part of 10 years, if he is to make it above Imran as a batsman; and if I bring bowling into it, you'll laugh again.

This thread is about Ben Stokes and most over rated cricketer - which I don't think he is, rather he is quite decent prospect to become border line great. If you count on his batting only, I have to say it's bang average as specialist bat, but he is a very good utility cricketer, along with his bowling as 5th bowler. But, for Ben Stokes, the all-rounder, if you bring Imran, Botham in that, I have to say the the title of this thread isn't that far. Tell me, after 37 Tests & being in batting purple patch for over a year or two, still his batting average is behind bowling average - why this guy should be rated higher than Ravi Shastri? This guy'll lose his England spot if he has just 6 months bad patch with bat.
Click to expand...

I didn't bring Imran into it. You did, and again I challenged your misleading use of stats. One of his centuries was in the 1970s by the way.

Neither do I accept the idea that batting at 6 or 7 automatically leads to many not outs. Botham batted there mostly. He has a lower average than Imran, but his actual run production per innings is higher because he kept hitting the ball trying to score for his team, instead of waiting to run out of partners. You could say Imran was good at shepherding the tail, and I have done. But I don't simultaneously claim that he was a world class batter. He wasn't. His fan club, most of whom never saw him play, cherrypick stats to make him look like a god.

If Richards and Border had such a percentage of not outs - and they had the skill to preserve their wickets - they would have averaged in the sixties instead of the fifties.

Stats are the beginning of understanding, not the end.
 
Oh, and I don't think Stokes is better than Shastri, whom I admire.
 
[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION]

My apologizes, if I have hurt you. Bringing the stat was to explain an ideal case scenario of a dream all-rounder. You must have seen lots of cricket, and your assessment of Ravi actually perfectly sums up where Stokes stands.

As of now, Stokes is an exciting prospect, but again he is in lime light, one major reason being what Sobers enjoyed. Just like him among Trevor Bailey, Intekhab & Halford; Stokes looks shining in an era where the next best pace bowling all-rounder is probably Pandeya. I brought Ravi, because in 80s era, probably none one even mentions him as all-rounder, but that block had 12 hundreds in 80 Tests & 160+ wickets. In 90s as well, we had Wasim, Cairns, Pollock, Kallis, to a lesser extent Vaas, Steve Waugh, Manoj, Hooper, Mahmood, McMillan...

BS is definitely one great prospect, but not probably as an all-rounder. However, he is definitely not the most over-rated, over hyped may be.
 
England fortunate to have match winners like Ali, Stokes and Bairstow in their batting line up.

Sadly don't get the plaudits they deserve because of their grossly overrated top order :root
 
Aman said:
England fortunate to have match winners like Ali, Stokes and Bairstow in their batting line up.

Sadly don't get the plaudits they deserve because of their grossly overrated top order :root
Click to expand...

Errrrm.. have you seen our #2, #3 and #5?
 
MMHS said:
[MENTION=7774]Robert[/MENTION]

My apologizes, if I have hurt you. Bringing the stat was to explain an ideal case scenario of a dream all-rounder. You must have seen lots of cricket, and your assessment of Ravi actually perfectly sums up where Stokes stands.

As of now, Stokes is an exciting prospect, but again he is in lime light, one major reason being what Sobers enjoyed. Just like him among Trevor Bailey, Intekhab & Halford; Stokes looks shining in an era where the next best pace bowling all-rounder is probably Pandeya. I brought Ravi, because in 80s era, probably none one even mentions him as all-rounder, but that block had 12 hundreds in 80 Tests & 160+ wickets. In 90s as well, we had Wasim, Cairns, Pollock, Kallis, to a lesser extent Vaas, Steve Waugh, Manoj, Hooper, Mahmood, McMillan...

BS is definitely one great prospect, but not probably as an all-rounder. However, he is definitely not the most over-rated, over hyped may be.
Click to expand...

Non need to apologise, no offence taken. I've got broader shoulders than that. Attack my ideas by all means. The only time I have a problem is when people are personally rude.
 
Aman said:
England fortunate to have match winners like Ali, Stokes and Bairstow in their batting line up.

Sadly don't get the plaudits they deserve because of their grossly overrated top order :root
Click to expand...

sorry to say but you have no credibility

i have been reading pp for long and i remember the time when you consider stokes the most overrated player and how nobodies like corey anderson and neesham were better than him :)))

you were also critical of williamson before he proved you wrong

now you are attacking root who will silence you as well
 
Ben Stokes reprimanded for breaching ICC Code of Conduct

MEDIA RELEASE 2 hrs 33 mins ago
Ben Stokes reprimanded for breaching ICC Code of Conduct
Ben Stokes
England allrounder was charged for “using language or a gesture that is obscene, offensive or insulting during an International Match”.
Ben Stokes of England has received an official reprimand for breaching Level 1 of the ICC Code of Conduct during the second day’s play in the Headingley Test against the Windies on Saturday.

Stokes was found to have breached Article 2.1.4 of the ICC Code of Conduct for Players and Player Support Personnel, which relates to “using language or a gesture that is obscene, offensive or insulting during an International Match”.

In addition to the reprimand for his breach of Article 2.1.4, one demerit point has been added to Stokes’s disciplinary record.

Stokes had come into this match with two demerit points against his name. As such, he is now on three demerit points and pursuant to Article 7.6 of the Code, if he reaches four or more demerit points within a 24-month period, they will be converted into suspension points* and he will be banned.

The incident happened in the 101st over of the Windies innings, when Ben Stokes reacted in frustration after being edged by Shai Hope for a boundary by making an inappropriate comment which was clearly audible through the stump mic and also heard by the match officials.

After the end of Saturday’s play, Stokes admitted the offence and accepted the sanction proposed by David Boon of the Emirates Elite Panel of ICC Match Referees and, as such, there was no need for a formal hearing.

The charge was levelled by on-field umpires Chris Gaffaney and S. Ravi, third umpire Marais Erasmus, all from the Emirates Elite Panel of ICC Umpires, as well as fourth umpire Nick Cook.

Level 1 breaches carry a minimum penalty of an official reprimand, a maximum penalty of 50 per cent of a player’s match fee, and one or two demerit points.

*Two suspension points equate to a ban from one Test or two ODIs or two T20Is, whatever comes first for the player

*Ben Stokes first offence – 30 October 2016
*Ben Stokes second offence – 26 November 2016

*Demerit Points to remain on a Player or Player Support Personnel’s disciplinary record for a period of twenty-four (24) months from their imposition following which they will be expunged.
 
Last edited:
But Englishmen are never sanctioned for abusive language? After all when Rabada received the same punishment it was just blatant racism wasn't it...?
 
Stokes has got a bit of a gob on him. It's important to be passionate but he will learn to cut out the expletives.
 
Lol Stokes has PP experts ducking for cover again. I don't even like him, but it's hard to deny that he impactful in all 3 departments of the game.
 
Was swinging the ball both ways and getting late swing too.
 
Now impacting the game with the ball, a potential great in the making.
 
Last edited:
Stokes shutting down his haters once again. Playing another matching knock. He is not just scoring. But scoring fast and demoralizing the opponents.

Stokes is the best all rounder and if anything, he is very very underrated.
 
Though his bowling still needs a lot of work but he has been tremendous with the bat lately.
 
I've been a Stokes hater, but watching his booming in-swingers yesterday, and a series of match winning knocks this summer are hard to ignore. Tempting to say that he's already the best all-rounder since the Kapil/Imran/Botham generation, but best to hold off on that.

On the topic of his batting, he needs to bat at 5 in a re-jigged order. He's good enough for that. More on that is best for a future relevant thread.
 
Last edited:
Changed my mind on him, he's become really consistent now. Still think Bairstow is a better bat, but he's ahead with the bat than Moeen and deserves to bat ahead of him.
 
Have typically been in the same camp with Stokes that I was with Flintoff, i.e. recognise his natural talent and rate him, but not a huge personal fan. Still in that camp. I think he will end up England's best ever all-rounder behind Botham though.
 
Stokes showing how some great form - Pakistan looking a little too comfortable.
 
Think he is an overrated player, average to good at best
English media lift him too much
 
AFTER a winless British winter in Test matches, England is hoping the return of a fully fit and focused Ben Stokes will inspire his team to victory over Pakistan.

The all-rounder’s absence was acutely felt as England was thrashed 4-0 by Australia in the Ashes at the turn of the year, with Stokes missing following an altercation outside a Bristol nightclub in September 2017.

He was allowed to return in March for England’s two-match series with New Zealand, but an undercooked Stokes - who was hardly available to bowl - was unable to change the fortunes of an already tired and depleted squad, which lost 1-0.

Having rebuilt his fitness since then, Stokes will be a genuine bowling option when the first Test of the English summer, against Pakistan, begins at Lord’s on Thursday.

“You can see he’s buzzing and desperate to get back out there,” England captain Joe Root said on Wednesday.

“You watch Ben train, and he sets the standard. He is a stand-out. If you watch a whole (practice) session, he does everything at match intensity and he helps drive it.

“To have his bowling as well will add to our attack and give us a different dimension. He knows that when he gets out there he will give absolutely everything for England.”


Root himself is set to take on more responsibility by moving up to number three in England’s batting order, while the recall of Jos Buttler and debut of 20-year-old spinner Dom Bess will also add freshness to the England squad.

Buttler has impressed in this season’s Indian Premier League, while Bess was a surprise inclusion following an injury to his Somerset teammate Jack Leach.

Bess has only played 16 first-class matches, but his 63 wickets in those appearances have convinced the England selectors he’s worthy of the opportunity.

“He is a very confident young man,” Root said. “He has a lot of energy... and seems like he is really clear about what he wants to do in the game and how he is going to approach this week.


“That is all you can ask of somebody going to make his debut, which is really exciting for me as captain.”

Bess might not be the only player making his test debut - Pakistan’s squad contains three uncapped batsmen.

Fakhar Zaman, Saad Ali and Usman Salahuddin could all earn their first cap for a side in transition, while Imam-ul-Haq - nephew of former Pakistan captain Inzamam - made his bow in the longest form of the game against Ireland two weeks ago.

Having scraped a narrow five-wicket victory in that match, Pakistan is relieved to have fast-bowler Mohammad Amir available following concerns over his knee.


“The senior players have to show responsibility,” Pakistan captain Sarfraz Ahmed said.

“Amir and I have played here before - so have Azhar (Ali) and (Asad) Shafiq. We have to lead from the front, and (provide) a good platform.”

Lord’s holds mixed memories for Amir. The left-arm bowler was banned after being caught spot fixing at the ground in 2010, before making his test return as Pakistan won at the home of cricket six years later.


Amir starred as Pakistan claimed a surprise 2-2 draw on that tour and although then captain Misbah-ul-Haq and fellow batsmen Younus Khan have since retired, the tourist side is confident of making an impact once more.

“I was part of the team in 2016,” Sarfraz added. “This team is different ... We had a lot of seniors then, but at the moment we have couple of good young players.

“Our test team is in a rebuilding phase - so if these youngsters do well here and gain confidence then it will be good for their future, their careers and for Pakistan team.”

Probable teams

England: Alastair Cook, Mark Stoneman, Joe Root (capt), Dawid Malan, Jonny Bairstow (wkt), Ben Stokes, Jos Buttler, Chris Woakes, Dominic Bess, Stuart Broad, James Anderson

Pakistan: Azhar Ali, Imam-ul-Haq, Haris Sohail, Asad Shafiq, Babar Azam, Sarfraz Ahmed (capt/wkt), Faheem Ashraf, Shadab Khan, Mohammad Amir, Mohammad Abbas, Rahat Ali

Umpires: Rod Tucker (AUS), Paul Reiffel (AUS) TV umpire: Bruce Oxenford (AUS) Match referee: Jeff Crowe (NZL)

https://www.foxsports.com.au/cricke...7/news-story/422de67e0ec9cfe22c9722f564d69acf
 
Last edited:
"Stokes is trying too hard, trying too many things. He needs to hit that fourth-stump line." says Waqar Younis on TMS
 
Can he do anything special to save the series for England?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

F
Why is Jofra Archer considered the most overrated cricketer in history?
Replies
36
Views
499
Forum363
F
Ball Blazer
  • Poll Poll
Will a Test series loss to India be the end of captaincy for Ben Stokes?
2
Replies
134
Views
4K
James
James
Hitman
Ricky Ponting would have punched Akash Deep had India pacer given him a Ben Duckett-like send-off
Replies
46
Views
1K
RedwoodOriginal
RedwoodOriginal
Cricket Warrior
[VIDEO] DRS Drama at Edgbaston: Ben Stokes vs Umpire Over Yashasvi Jaiswal Review Controversy
Replies
30
Views
1K
BDfanforever
B
N
Top 25 Test Batsman with Most Runs against Top 5 teams of their times since last 35 years
Replies
3
Views
131
Narayana59
N
Back
Top