Is Chris Woakes a world class A/R or is it another case of Pakistanis making someone a superstar?

[Strike Rate]

Predict the number of wickets Chris Woakes is going to take in this series

Already 15 wickets in 3 innings. Pakistan still have 2 wickets left in this inning so there is a chance he will endup with a 5fer in all 3 innings so far.

There are total of 4 Tests so guess how many wickets he is going to get in this series against Pakistan? (if he play all 4 matches)

My guess is 30-32 wickets.

 

[Strike Rate]

Thanks GOD there isn't a 5th Test otherwise he was probably going to break Johnson record of 37 wickets in Ashes (2013)

 

[Titan of Technique]

Shouldn't feel bad about it.Atleast Woakes is a good bowler.We on the other hand helped have a test career by gifting him 19 wickets

 

[Zak_Fan]

There is a good chance that Woakes will end up with more wickets than the entire Pakistani pace battery. He has been sensational this series.

 

[#GreenRoars]

22 wickets.

 

[Fahdi]

The way he is going he may get 30 or even more wickets.

 

[Robert]

Thirty. At about fifteen apiece.

 

[AamchiMumbaikar]

Amazed at this guys bowling this series


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Robert]

Thanks GOD there isn't a 5th Test otherwise he was probably going to break Johnson record of 37 wickets in Ashes (2013)

That's not the record. Lillee got 39 once, and Alderman took 41 and then 40. Though those were all six-test series IIRC.

 

[Sidilicious]

Shouldn't feel bad about it.Atleast Woakes is a good bowler.We on the other hand helped have a test career by gifting him 19 wickets

still can't come to terms with that

On topic, 25. I expect Anderson and Broad to be more dominant for the remaining tests.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Slog]

Discuss

 

[The_KING]

He isn't world class. He is only decent. We are once again making a decent bowler look great. Nothing new for Pakistani batsmen.

 

[Big Mac]

Nah, Woakes is quality.

 

[Mamoon]

Might not be able to sustain this performance consistently but he is a quality player nonetheless.

 

[IAJ]

Firstly pakistani batsmen are rubbish so allways difficult to judge a bowler bowling to them.

But we know Broad and Jimmy are very good and Woakes has sort of bowled better than them though Jimmy is only playing his first Test of the series.

And re his batting, he has shown how good he is already. So yes a very good allrounder and he will become better, seems like a quick learner.

 

[Syed1]

He is good for these types of pitches. Will not amount to much in the subcontinent..

 

[delpiero10]

He's good, with the potential to be very good. Although a few of his wickets have been fortunate in this series, it's not as though he's got the bulk of them bowling pies, is it?

Obviously nobody can sustain a batting average of 58 and bowling average of 12 as Woakes currently has in this series!

He will regress to his normal level. Which, if he plays to his potential, could still be very good.

 

[abughio]

had good defence in batting.. have good pace and moving the ball both ways.. one thing i have noticed is he goes wayward once he is attacked.

seems to be a good all rounder

 

[Fahdi]

He has bowled very well in this series but not that well. He should have had 11-12 wickets I guess but he certainly didn't bowl well enough to have 16!!(could make that 17-18 by the end of this match).

He certainly has potential with the bat and can average 30+.

He can average under 29 with the ball and a little over 30 with the bat. Which in all honesty is good enough to make him a WC allrounder.

 

[Slog]

Firstly pakistani batsmen are rubbish so allways difficult to judge a bowler bowling to them.

But we know Broad and Jimmy are very good and Woakes has sort of bowled better than them though Jimmy is only playing his first Test of the series.

And re his batting, he has shown how good he is already. So yes a very good allrounder and he will become better, seems like a quick learner.

We do have a tendency to not be as bad against the main men but then make superstars of relatively unknown bowlers

 

[Lords]

Never judge a player based on his performance against pakistan. Pakistan has habbit of making good players look like rubbish and mediocore as superstars.

 

[Square Drive]

He's a very good player.

 

[James]

Woakes did really well against Sri Lanka also. The performance of players is about that player, not about some arrogant fanciful notion of Pakistan 'making players look good'. He isn't world-class but he is emerging as a quality cricketer.

 

[Pete Rose]

I think he is a good place right now. Unfortunately for us, the dynamic batsmen in our team (hafeez, shafiq, and sarfaraz) have not lasted long enough to flog him for runs.

 

[Ab Fan]

Woakes isn't yet World Class but he is emerging as a quality bowler with his performance this summer. Ashwin, Matthews, Shakib and Stokes are world class All Rounders going around.

 

[Buffet]

He looked good to me. A long way to go before I can call him a world class all rounder, but credit should be given for performing well here.

 

[zoro]

Woakes isn't yet World Class but he is emerging as a quality bowler with his performance this summer. Ashwin, Matthews, Shakib and Stokes are world class All Rounders going around.

Geez man what are u talking about?
Aswin and shakib are world class allrounders?
Matthews can bat but he bowls like anwar ali , so add anwar to your list as well.
Sokes can bowl but hes just a slogger.

World class all rounders were kallis, ik and kapil not these guys!

 

[Slog]

Woakes did really well against Sri Lanka also. The performance of players is about that player, not about some arrogant fanciful notion of Pakistan 'making players look good'. He isn't world-class but he is emerging as a quality cricketer.

Where's the arrogance here?

 

[Sandeep]

Woakes is good. I feel he'll take over the mantle from Anderson as the premier bowler of England. Amazing control and great late swing. I wouldn't mind having him as a bowler alone. But he can bat, and bat as good as anyone! He can easily play in top 5 of Pakistan, Sri Lanka and West Indies line ups.

Summarizing, I'd play him as a bowler alone. His disciplined batting is an added advantage.

 

[Sandeep]

Geez man what are u talking about?
Aswin and shakib are world class allrounders?
Matthews can bat but he bowls like anwar ali , so add anwar to your list as well.
Sokes can bowl but hes just a slogger.

World class all rounders were kallis, ik and kapil not these guys!

Stokes is a slogger? He scored 258 against RSA in RSA. Geez, do you even watch cricket?

 

[Xeeebon]

Pakistanis making someone superstar....

 

[zoro]

Woakes did really well against Sri Lanka also. The performance of players is about that player, not about some arrogant fanciful notion of Pakistan 'making players look good'. He isn't world-class but he is emerging as a quality cricketer.

Woakes is not a genuine allrounder by any stretch of the imagination. Hes bowling and batting on grounds that he spent years playing on. Decent bowler and someone who can score a few runs down the order but not a genuine allrounder(someone who can get into the team as a batsman alone or as a bowler alone). Also, pak batting is pathetic with the exception of asad and misbah. Thats what they mean by pak making woakes look good, not being arrogrant but refering to how pathetic we are.

 

[Robert]

He is a yard quicker since last year and has got more accurate. His batting has always been test #8 standard. I wouldn't put him higher. I think he can get regular fifties and will get a century or two by the time he finishes.

 

[leatherface58]

Geez man what are u talking about?
Aswin and shakib are world class allrounders?
Matthews can bat but he bowls like anwar ali , so add anwar to your list as well.
Sokes can bowl but hes just a slogger.

World class all rounders were kallis, ik and kapil not these guys!

Yes one who is scoring a 250 in South Africa in a test at faster than 100 strike rate is a slogger.

A guy who scores 100 and takes 7-fer in the same test is not at least world class.

And clearly anyone playing in the current decade cannot be world class because "back in the day...."

Watch the game sometimes before commenting on it.

 

[the SHA]

Pakistanis making someone superstar....

Fully agreed. I'm sorry but Woakes is a quality county bowler. He's in the form of his life against a strangled, negative and technically bemused top order. Some of the deliveries he is taking wickets with wouldn't dislodge an Aussie no. 11.

 

[MenInG]

He is a yard quicker since last year and has got more accurate. His batting has always been test #8 standard. I wouldn't put him higher. I think he can get regular fifties and will get a century or two by the time he finishes.

Agreed. Grossly unfair to underrate him to please Pakistan egos.

 

[Sandeep]

Yes one who is scoring a 250 in South Africa in a test at faster than 100 strike rate is a slogger.

A guy who scores 100 and takes 7-fer in the same test is not at least world class.

And clearly anyone playing in the current decade cannot be world class because "back in the day...."

Watch the game sometimes before commenting on it.

He slogged his way to 258, didn't you know that?

 

[zoro]

Stokes is a slogger? He scored 258 against RSA in RSA. Geez, do you even watch cricket?

Watched it!
Was a complete slogfest!
But when its your day its your day!
Even superman AFRIDI has test hundredS!
Afridi scored a lovely slogfest test century in India, i recall and also scored centuries in odis , a few in india if i recall!

 

[Buffet]

Geez man what are u talking about?
Aswin and shakib are world class allrounders?
Matthews can bat but he bowls like anwar ali , so add anwar to your list as well.
Sokes can bowl but hes just a slogger.

World class all rounders were kallis, ik and kapil not these guys!

Ashwin, Shakib etc are surely world class all rounders. Kallis, IK, Kapil etc were ATG all rounders. Every world class all rounder is not going to be an ATG all-rounder.

 

[zoro]

He slogged his way to 258, didn't you know that?

Akrams highest test score is 257 higher than sachin's highest test score.
So would you say wasim was a genuine allrounder?
Do you know what the definition of a genuine allrounder is?
Ive been watching cricket before you were even born!

 

[Hasan123]

An improved cricketer no doubt but Pakistan are making him look better than he is. But he's earned a long rope in current England set up.

 

[zoro]

Ashwin, Shakib etc are surely world class all rounders. Kallis, IK, Kapil etc were ATG all rounders. Every world class all rounder is not going to be an ATG all-rounder.

Ok then im nominating hafeez (before his ban)as a world class allrounder too.

 

[MMHS]

Let him play the 5 Test in India & then one Ashes tour; then we can tell better.

There are not many Ranji sides, who would give a bowler wicket in 1st over of a spell, on a batting belter - 5 (or 6) times, in 4 innings.

Looks potential indeed, but, before this summer, he had 6 wickets in 8 Test (or opposite?) & a batting average of ~ 25.

 

[zoro]

Let him play the 5 Test in India & then one Ashes tour; then we can tell better.

There are not many Ranji sides, who would give a bowler wicket in 1st over of a spell, on a batting belter - 5 (or 6) times, in 4 innings.

Looks potential indeed, but, before this summer, he had 6 wickets in 8 Test (or opposite?) & a batting average of ~ 25.

At last someone with some actual cricket acumen on this forum.
Good post bro!

 

[Ab Fan]

Geez man what are u talking about?
Aswin and shakib are world class allrounders?
Matthews can bat but he bowls like anwar ali , so add anwar to your list as well.
Sokes can bowl but hes just a slogger.

World class all rounders were kallis, ik and kapil not these guys!

World class all rounders can be great players and not necessarily ATGs. The ones u mentioned are ATGs and these guys are young and have to go long way to get compared with them.

Someone like Flintoff is not ATG but I would call him World Class AR.

 

[Flat_Track_Bully]

Very confident, looks a good prospect.

 

[Sandeep]

World class all rounders can be great players and not necessarily ATGs. The ones u mentioned are ATGs and these guys are young and have to go long way to get compared with them.

Someone like Flintoff is not ATG but I would call him World Class AR.

Flintoff was a slogger, not an allrounder. Only IK, Kapil, Kallis are allrounders.

 

[zoro]

Yes one who is scoring a 250 in South Africa in a test at faster than 100 strike rate is a slogger.t.

the strike rate should have given it away that it was a slogfest!

And yes i did watch it as i watch most of englands tests home and away because i am ENGLISH!

 

[Ab Fan]

Flintoff was a slogger, not an allrounder. Only IK, Kapil, Kallis are allrounders.

They are ATG all rounders.

The likes of Cairns and Flintoff are great all rounders.

 

[Ab Fan]

Akrams highest test score is 257 higher than sachin's highest test score.
So would you say wasim was a genuine allrounder?
Do you know what the definition of a genuine allrounder is?
Ive been watching cricket before you were even born!

Wasim avgs 22 with 2 centuries. That's not what makes you a genuine AR. You need to be close to averaging 30 with bat to be called a genuine bowling AR.

 

[Slog]

For me the true statistical test as a rule of thumb of an all rounder is for the batting average to be higher than bowling average.

 

[zoro]

Wasim avgs 22 with 2 centuries. That's not what makes you a genuine AR. You need to be close to averaging 30 with bat to be called a genuine bowling AR.

I have never consider wasim as an allrounder!
I was arguing that stokes is a decent bowler but a slogger when it comes to batting. Sandeep and leatherface kept going on about his score of 258 in SA to try and argue with me, so i used wasims score of 257 to counter their argument.

 

[Ab Fan]

I have never consider wasim as an allrounder!
I was arguing that stokes is a decent bowler but a slogger when it comes to batting. Sandeep and leatherface kept going on about his score of 258 in SA to try and argue with me, so i used wasims score of 257 to counter their argument.

Stokes 258 was a top knock even if you say its a completely flat pitch.Not many can play such a big knock with such high SR like Stokes did. Ofcourse, he is young and has a lot to do but he is a potential world class.

 

[zoro]

For me the true statistical test as a rule of thumb of an all rounder is for the batting average to be higher than bowling average.

I dont know the answer but how does afridi do in you test?(test match only)

 

[MMHS]

Wasim avgs 22 with 2 centuries. That's not what makes you a genuine AR. You need to be close to averaging 30 with bat to be called a genuine bowling AR.

I think 4, but points taken. He was never serious regarding his batting; but even then he had few match winning knocks when chips were down, indicates potential was much more. May be diabetics didn't help working extra hours.

I see lot's of theory in All-rounders - to me there are 4 types

- Batting all-rounders, who would make the team if they are for some reason banned for bowling (MoHa indeed one in Asia) - the best ever I have seen in Kallis
- Bowling all-rounder, who makes the team on bowling merit, but can contribute with bat - best one I have seen in Wasim Akram
- The genuine all-rounder - someone, who would make the team simply as a bowler or batsman & capable of winning the game either with bat or ball. There are only 4 in cricket history - Imran, Miller, Botham & Kapil; with Khan being the best to me
- Bits & pieces - all-rounders that doesn't make the team for either skills, but 2/3 of them actually makes a very good combination; if you can select horses for courses. No offence, but there are many, many such - current England team is making a tremendous side with Woakes, Moeen, Rashid, Stokes in their line up.

Woakes, still is in the 4th category, but he can move to the bowling all-rounder's category if he can maintain his bowling. My hunch is, he is going to create selection problem for for England in India & AUS - ENG 'll need 2 spinners in IND & a 3rd fast bowler in AUS - if he can still keep his place for 10 Tests (barring injury) for his bowling in IND & AUS - indeed, I'll take him as a bowling all-rounder. As of now, he is a good bits & pieces all-rounder (like Azhar Mahmood), who is going through a Midas touch period - again like Azhar, who had 3 outstanding hundreds in his 1st 5 Tests, all against SAF & 2 in SAF..

 

[James]

Where's the arrogance here?

That Pakistan somehow have this unique ability to 'make players look good', a notion designed to keep Pakistan at the centre of attention and denigrate the quality performance of many a hard-working cricketer. Definitely arrogance and it has been going on for years on the forum.

 

[James]

Agreed. Grossly unfair to underrate him to please Pakistan egos.

Well said.

 

[zoro]

Stokes 258 was a top knock even if you say its a completely flat pitch.Not many can play such a big knock with such high SR like Stokes did. Ofcourse, he is young and has a lot to do but he is a potential world class.

I watched it live on skysports! No doubt it was a fantastic innings but it was a slogfest, the strike rate should give that away!

Afridi has similar test centuries i.e. slogfest.

Stokes cant play spin. He does well on flat pitches against pacers.
afridi cant play genuine pace . He does well against spin.
Are either good enough to be called World class allrounders?
(Im NOT comparing afridi to stokes, im trying to fnd out what you guys think a world class allrounder is)

 

[zoro]

I think 4, but points taken. He was never serious regarding his batting; but even then he had few match winning knocks when chips were down, indicates potential was much more. May be diabetics didn't help working extra hours.

I see lot's of theory in All-rounders - to me there are 4 types

- Batting all-rounders, who would make the team if they are for some reason banned for bowling (MoHa indeed one in Asia) - the best ever I have seen in Kallis
- Bowling all-rounder, who makes the team on bowling merit, but can contribute with bat - best one I have seen in Wasim Akram
- The genuine all-rounder - someone, who would make the team simply as a bowler or batsman & capable of winning the game either with bat or ball. There are only 4 in cricket history - Imran, Miller, Botham & Kapil; with Khan being the best to me
- Bits & pieces - all-rounders that doesn't make the team for either skills, but 2/3 of them actually makes a very good combination; if you can select horses for courses. No offence, but there are many, many such - current England team is making a tremendous side with Woakes, Moeen, Rashid, Stokes in their line up.

Woakes, still is in the 4th category, but he can move to the bowling all-rounder's category if he can maintain his bowling. My hunch is, he is going to create selection problem for for England in India & AUS - ENG 'll need 2 spinners in IND & a 3rd fast bowler in AUS - if he can still keep his place for 10 Tests (barring injury) for his bowling in IND & AUS - indeed, I'll take him as a bowling all-rounder. As of now, he is a good bits & pieces all-rounder (like Azhar Mahmood), who is going through a Midas touch period - again like Azhar, who had 3 outstanding hundreds in his 1st 5 Tests, all against SAF & 2 in SAF..

ABSOLUTELY KILLED IT SIR!
This was what i was trying to say but admitly badly.
This is the reason MMHS is rated as one of the top posters on PP!

Now kids anymore questions, ask MMHS sir, as im off to bed.

 

[Ab Fan]

I watched it live on skysports! No doubt it was a fantastic innings but it was a slogfest, the strike rate should give that away!

Afridi has similar test centuries i.e. slogfest.

Stokes cant play spin. He does well on flat pitches against pacers.
afridi cant play genuine pace . He does well against spin.
Are either good enough to be called World class allrounders?
(Im NOT comparing afridi to stokes, im trying to fnd out what you guys think a world class allrounder is)

Well, Afridi definitely had potential to play such test centuries or slogfests. He smashed a 37 ball 100 in odi and played a brilliant 141 in Chennai test too.With the ball, he was pretty decent too.

But the thing is that you talk about potential for younger players not for those who have retired or already played 100+ tests and have built their legacy.

Afridi was a potential World class All rounder but at the end we look at results.Afridi underachieved a lot simply because he didn't used his brain. He had the skill set which he showed during his early days with bat but later regressed a lot.

If you would have asked me of Afridi in 1999, I would have said he is a potential World class like I m talking about Stokes.Its up to the players where they end up at and that is what matters in the end.

 

[The Last Of The Stars]

Come on, let him play some more Tests before asking such a question.

 

[leatherface58]

the strike rate should have given it away that it was a slogfest!

And yes i did watch it as i watch most of englands tests home and away because i am ENGLISH!

You are not English because no English can be this ignorant about cricket. I disagree with their views on the game sometimes but I cannot dispute the fact that most of them know the game. You do not.

Slogging is not batting aggressively. It is hitting aggressive shots with no rhyme or reason hoping to get positive results. If you actually saw Stokes bat, he was hitting proper shots albeit with a lot of force.

Please do not embarrass yourself further. Actually do embarrass yourself further. I want to be amused.

 

[Ab Fan]

I think 4, but points taken. He was never serious regarding his batting; but even then he had few match winning knocks when chips were down, indicates potential was much more. May be diabetics didn't help working extra hours.

I see lot's of theory in All-rounders - to me there are 4 types

- Batting all-rounders, who would make the team if they are for some reason banned for bowling (MoHa indeed one in Asia) - the best ever I have seen in Kallis
- Bowling all-rounder, who makes the team on bowling merit, but can contribute with bat - best one I have seen in Wasim Akram
- The genuine all-rounder - someone, who would make the team simply as a bowler or batsman & capable of winning the game either with bat or ball. There are only 4 in cricket history - Imran, Miller, Botham & Kapil; with Khan being the best to me
- Bits & pieces - all-rounders that doesn't make the team for either skills, but 2/3 of them actually makes a very good combination; if you can select horses for courses. No offence, but there are many, many such - current England team is making a tremendous side with Woakes, Moeen, Rashid, Stokes in their line up.

Woakes, still is in the 4th category, but he can move to the bowling all-rounder's category if he can maintain his bowling. My hunch is, he is going to create selection problem for for England in India & AUS - ENG 'll need 2 spinners in IND & a 3rd fast bowler in AUS - if he can still keep his place for 10 Tests (barring injury) for his bowling in IND & AUS - indeed, I'll take him as a bowling all-rounder. As of now, he is a good bits & pieces all-rounder (like Azhar Mahmood), who is going through a Midas touch period - again like Azhar, who had 3 outstanding hundreds in his 1st 5 Tests, all against SAF & 2 in SAF..

Nobody is saying that Woakes is world class or potentially WC.. Let him play some more games and do something with bat too.

Stokes had a 5 fer vs Aus and smashed a 250 at 100+ SR vs SA. Surely we can talk of his potential.

 

[zoro]

You are not English because no English can be this ignorant about cricket. I disagree with their views on the game sometimes but I cannot dispute the fact that most of them know the game. You do not.

Slogging is not batting aggressively. It is hitting aggressive shots with no rhyme or reason hoping to get positive results. If you actually saw Stokes bat, he was hitting proper shots albeit with a lot of force.

Please do not embarrass yourself further. Actually do embarrass yourself further. I want to be amused.

Im english born and bred!

Cant explain it better than MMHS sir, please refer to his post, thanks and good night whereever you are!

 

[zoro]

Well, Afridi definitely had potential to play such test centuries or slogfests. He smashed a 37 ball 100 in odi and played a brilliant 141 in Chennai test too.With the ball, he was pretty decent too.

But the thing is that you talk about potential for younger players not for those who have retired or already played 100+ tests and have built their legacy.

Afridi was a potential World class All rounder but at the end we look at results.Afridi underachieved a lot simply because he didn't used his brain. He had the skill set which he showed during his early days with bat but later regressed a lot.

If you would have asked me of Afridi in 1999, I would have said he is a potential World class like I m talking about Stokes.Its up to the players where they end up at and that is what matters in the end.

Fair comments sir.
My perspective of what a genuine allrounder is, was beautifully explained in MMHS post please refer to it because it is a textbook definition in my humble opinion.

 

[Chrish]

That Pakistan somehow have this unique ability to 'make players look good', a notion designed to keep Pakistan at the centre of attention and denigrate the quality performance of many a hard-working cricketer. Definitely arrogance and it has been going on for years on the forum.

No arrogance, rather self-deprecation

 

[HitWicket]

[MENTION=140807]zoro[/MENTION] Eh, fairly sure woakes would be in this current England side as a bowler even if he couldn't bat particularly given how he's going at the moment.

Stokes a slogger? Stop making a fool of yourself.

 

[Robert]

That Pakistan somehow have this unique ability to 'make players look good', a notion designed to keep Pakistan at the centre of attention and denigrate the quality performance of many a hard-working cricketer. Definitely arrogance and it has been going on for years on the forum.

Nailed it.

 

[Chief Destroyer]

Neither.

 

[ExplicitAI]

The same thing happened with Kyle Abbott when he first made his debut against us, where is he now?

 

[Pantani]

Woakes did really well against Sri Lanka also. The performance of players is about that player, not about some arrogant fanciful notion of Pakistan 'making players look good'. He isn't world-class but he is emerging as a quality cricketer.

It's self-deprecation not arrogance

 

[Jabo]

He is good, but we made him into a bigger star than what he actually is.

South Africa/Australia and even NZ would probably have handled him well, even the Indian bowlers probably wouldn't have let them put that much runs on the board

 

[zoro]

[MENTION=140807]zoro[/MENTION] Eh, fairly sure woakes would be in this current England side as a bowler even if he couldn't bat particularly given how he's going at the moment.

Stokes a slogger?Stop making a fool of yourself

woakes is in the team as a bowler(3rd seamer)Would he be in the team as a batsman, i think not. Therefore, he is not a genuine allrounder. Many guys have done this in the past i.e. bowlers who can bat a bit are they all allrounders eg flintof, akram etc. Someone here mention kyle abbot as another example. Like mmhs said hes a bit and pieces player(look at his record before this series and the SL series, 2 very weak batting line ups in uk conditions)
And lets see how he does in the future and maybe you can call him a bowling allrounder if he continues to do well in both.

I apologise, stokes has a sachinest beauty when hes batting. A textbook technique and flawless defence.

Happy now?

bookmark this page and in 3 years time we'll see if stokes is englands new botham or the new flintof (and please dont say flintoff was a world class allrounder, cos then im just gonna give up!)

 

[zoro]

And lets not forget GOAT allrounder stuart broad who scored a magnificient 169 against asif, amir and co.

 

[Buffet]

Ok then im nominating hafeez (before his ban)as a world class allrounder too.

Hafeez is hardly a bowler in the test format. He takes like one wicket in each test. In 50 tests he has 50 wickets.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

All of them Stokes, Woakes and I would even say at some point Amir has potential to be an all rounder.

It's all about potential.

Stokes is higher up the list, and looks a genuine all rounder.

Woakes is second in line. He will NOT be picked for his batting, at the moment, if his bowling flops. So he is being picked for his bowling.

Amir is getting better with every match in batting, but he is picked for his BOWLING. Amir will not be picked if he bowls awful but scores 50s (or in Pakistan, he might get picked anyway, because of birthright).

But the point is, no one can predict how the careers will end.

I feel Stokes has the highest ceiling.

 

[LegendAli]

Woakes isn't yet World Class but he is emerging as a quality bowler with his performance this summer. Ashwin, Matthews, Shakib and Stokes are world class All Rounders going around.

) ) ) Somebody please tell this guy to go to sleep already.

 

[Zak_Fan]

That Pakistan somehow have this unique ability to 'make players look good', a notion designed to keep Pakistan at the centre of attention and denigrate the quality performance of many a hard-working cricketer. Definitely arrogance and it has been going on for years on the forum.

Sums up the entire thread.

Take that Wahab spell for example. If Wahab was an Australian and Watson was a Pakistani, then the threads here wouldn't be about Wahab's brilliance, but rather about Watson making a useless spraygun look good.

 

[Ab Fan]

) ) ) Somebody please tell this guy to go to sleep already.

Yes Moen Ali is the greatest player to ever hold both the bat and ball.

 

[James]

He is good, but we made him into a bigger star than what he actually is.

There it goes again.