[VIDEOS] Ben Stokes named England Men’s Test Skipper: captaincy watch thread

[Mamoon]

Not for the first time you allow your emotions and personal bias cloud your thinking.

Stokes' captaincy during a drawn Ashes and a defeat in India is far from flawless, but arguing it's a sackable offence while Root's record of 1 win in 17 Tests was not is so preposterous it's not worthy of further comment.

It is a sackable offence when you (Stokes & McCullum) spend two years talking about your brand of cricket is the right way forward, how you are revolutionizing the way Test cricket is played and reviving interest. The evangelism associated with Bazball was cringeworthy but it has all proved to be all talk and no show as England have failed to do anything that they did not previously manage especially when we talk about the Ashes and playing in India.

It is very clear that Bazball is not a sustainable or the right way to play Test cricket and it is time for England to go into a new direction. Can this duo do that? Maybe they can, but they have invested so much into the Bazball hype and they have been so full of themselves that they will look like absolute fools by changing their approach now and that has happened already - Stokes eating his own words and playing defensive, negative cricket in the fourth Test India was the ultimate defeat for Bazball and his leadership.

This is why, it is time for England to repivot towards new leadership and go back to basics, implementing a brand of Test cricket that has stood the test of time and has brought success for England in the future. The Stokes era doesn't hold a candle to the Strauss era and Strauss didn't need to play Bazball.

Well there's this for starters:

2021 - England 0-1 New Zealand
2022 - England 3-0 New Zealand

The main difference between 2021 and 2022 was not the captaincy but Root's runs. It goes without saying that Root is the key to England's batting fortunes and him averaging 24 in 2021 vs averaging 99 in 2022 goes a long way in explaining why England lost in 2021 and won in 2022.

Under Root in 2018, England drew 1-1 against a poor Pakistan team that'd just been blanked by Sri Lanka in UAE. Then in 2020 they scraped a win in the only completed Test against Pakistan. Both home series where England should've dominated.

In 2022, Stokes toured Pakistan and schooled us comprehensively 0-3. It's unlikely any captain, let alone Root, would've extracted a result from the Rawalpindi Test on that graveyard pitch.

The 1-1 draw in New Zealand in 22/23 was still an improvement over the 2018 tour where England lost 1-0 including an embarrassing 58 all out in the day-nighter.

England led by Rishi Sunak, let alone Stokes, would thrash Pakistan in Pakistan these days. Pakistan is one of the worst Test teams around and they are easy prey for any half-decent team even at home because Pakistan produces dead pitches. England would beat current Pakistan in Test cricket anywhere in the world no matter what "ball" they implement.

Also it is funny how you are quick to use the rain excuse for England not winning the fifth Ashes Test under Stokes but don't want to extend the same excuse for England not winning the third Test vs Pakistan in 2020, where rain saved Pakistan from an absolute hammering.

As far as the two tours of New Zealand are concerned (2018 vs 2023), the key difference was the presence and absence of Boult.

New Zealand's bowling has been greatly impacted by the absence of Boult. His replacement, Matt Henry, averages 36 and has significantly weakened their bowling attack. Boult was the highest wicket-taker in 2018 and took 15 wickets @18 including a 6-fer to route England for 58.

Stokes and the so-called revolutionary Bazball lost a Test in New Zealand without Boult. So much for being a great Test captain and Bazball this and that.

Pray tell who kept that Ashes series alive in the 3rd Test at Headingley ?

So what? We are talking about captaincy results, not individual performances. This actually exposes your hypocrisy - you are taking credit away from Root for not losing the Ashes in 2019 because it was Stokes' brilliance that saved the third Test, but you refuse to extend the same logic to England whitewashing New Zealand in 2023. What would have been the outcome of that series without Root's 396 runs?

 

[Markhor]

It is very clear that Bazball is not a sustainable or the right way to play Test cricket and it is time for England to go into a new direction. Can this duo do that?

Seeing as you refuse to climb out of the hole you've dug yourself, let me clarify to everyone else your amazing logic.

After England win 5 out of 8 Test series, with the sole slipups being a draw to the double World Champions and defeat to the most dominant home nation in the modern era:

You - This is untenable. A new direction is required !

After England won 1 Test in 17 including their only winless home summer since 2001:

You - Root should remain captain. A new direction is not required !

No captain anywhere in the world would survive such a torrid run - and you know in your heart you wouldn't spare a Pakistani skipper for such a record, and rightly so.

However let me also note your changing of tune. On Page 1 you claimed replacing Root with Stokes would "not improve anything" but now you insist Stokes' England haven't beaten anybody his predecessors couldn't have defeated. An ideological disagreement with Bazball, and the cultlike evangelising (which I've criticised from Day 1) is one thing - but intellectual dishonesty is another.

This is why, it is time for England to repivot towards new leadership and go back to basics, implementing a brand of Test cricket that has stood the test of time and has brought success for England in the future. The Stokes era doesn't hold a candle to the Strauss era and Strauss didn't need to play Bazball.

That tried and tested brand of cricket produced 1 win in 17 Tests, their first home Test series defeat since 2014, and only winless home summer since 2001. If we both agree the current generation of English red-ball batters have suspect defences in bowling conditions - why do you assume tried and tested cricket would work ?

England led by Rishi Sunak, let alone Stokes, would thrash Pakistan in Pakistan these days. Pakistan is one of the worst Test teams around and they are easy prey for any half-decent team even at home because Pakistan produces dead pitches. England would beat current Pakistan in Test cricket anywhere in the world no matter what "ball" they implement.

Australia and New Zealand toured the same year and only managed 0-1 and 0-0 results respectively on the same graveyard pitches whereas England blew us away 0-3 in the same conditions. Why didn't England decisively beat a Pakistan with far weaker batting in 2018 during Root's tenure ? Why did they only scrape by in Manchester in 2020 ?

As far as the two tours of New Zealand are concerned (2018 vs 2023), the key difference was the presence and absence of Boult.

New Zealand's bowling has been greatly impacted by the absence of Boult. His replacement, Matt Henry, averages 36 and has significantly weakened their bowling attack. Boult was the highest wicket-taker in 2018 and took 15 wickets @18 including a 6-fer to route England for 58.

Stokes and the so-called revolutionary Bazball lost a Test in New Zealand without Boult. So much for being a great Test captain and Bazball this and that.

Dr saab here's a quick refresher seeing we're playing the game of grading wins vs NZ based on Trent Boult's absence.

In 2021 when NZ beat England 0-1 - the only Test England drew was...the one Boult missed. They promptly lost the 2nd upon his return.

In 2022 when England beat NZ 3-0 - Trent Boult played all three Tests.

So what? We are talking about captaincy results, not individual performances. This actually exposes your hypocrisy - you are taking credit away from Root for not losing the Ashes in 2019 because it was Stokes' brilliance that saved the third Test, but you refuse to extend the same logic to England whitewashing New Zealand in 2023. What would have been the outcome of that series without Root's 396 runs?

With respect, I don't need lessons on hypocrisy from someone who claimed England's results wouldn't improve upon ending Root's captaincy but changed goalposts when it did.

From someone who claimed Brendon McCullum was a suicidal maverick before his appointment then stated England's success was purely down to McCullum and not Stokes.

From someone who voted for Imran Khan in 2018 (and don't even try to deny this comment) because you couldn't look your mother in the eye, then bashes him non-stop for the next 6 years.

From someone who'll in a flash quote old posts proving himself right but never holds himself accountable for the flop predictions. One thing you'll guarantee from me is if somebody proves me wrong - I will always give due credit. Perhaps it's time you learned that lesson.

 

[James]

The Stokes era doesn't hold a candle to the Strauss era and Strauss didn't need to play Bazball.

Thats true but I personally don’t rate Strauss as highly as some other England captains, yes he was good at the job and very successful, but he really should have been — look at the players he had at his disposal. Batsmen who all averaged over 40 / near 50 and needed no coaching whatsoever, and vastly experienced bowlers who made their own plans and set their own fields. Strauss just had to stand at slip.

Start with Strauss himself. One of England’s best postwar openers.
Cook. Possibly England’s best ever opener. Probably gets into an all time England XI.
Trott. Gun number 3 in a historically problematic batting position for England.
KP. One of England’s best ever batsmen. Easily gets into the England all time XI.
Bell. Another world class batsman.
Flintoff. One of England’s best ever all rounders.
Prior. Wicketkeeper batsman who averaged over 40.
Swann. England’s best ever spin bowler alongside Underwood.
Broad and Anderson. Two of England’s best ever seam bowlers. Never get injured or miss a game. Anderson is basically the English Goat.

Stokes has nowhere near the calibre of player that Strauss had. The only world class players were Broad before he retired, and now it’s Root and a very old Anderson. Apart from that he has three top order batters who were absolutely awful international players before he became their captain and filled them with confidence, an aged Bairstow who is way past his best and fat with one working leg, and a bunch of nervous rookie bowlers who Stokes pretty much has to parent.

 

[RyanRyan10]

Stokes' W/L ratio is 1.75 (14 wins and 8 losses), which is better than his predecessors Root (1.04, 27-26) and Cook (1.09, 24-22). If he can manage to finish his captaincy tenure with similar W/L ratio and similar no of wins then he will settle all the debates.

 

[Ab Fan]

Thats true but I personally don’t rate Strauss as highly as some other England captains, yes he was good at the job and very successful, but he really should have been — look at the players he had at his disposal. Batsmen who all averaged over 40 / near 50 and needed no coaching whatsoever, and vastly experienced bowlers who made their own plans and set their own fields. Strauss just had to stand at slip.

Start with Strauss himself. One of England’s best postwar openers.
Cook. Possibly England’s best ever opener. Probably gets into an all time England XI.
Trott. Gun number 3 in a historically problematic batting position for England.
KP. One of England’s best ever batsmen. Easily gets into the England all time XI.
Bell. Another world class batsman.
Flintoff. One of England’s best ever all rounders.
Prior. Wicketkeeper batsman who averaged over 40.
Swann. England’s best ever spin bowler alongside Underwood.
Broad and Anderson. Two of England’s best ever seam bowlers. Never get injured or miss a game. Anderson is basically the English Goat.

Stokes has nowhere near the calibre of player that Strauss had. The only world class players were Broad before he retired, and now it’s Root and a very old Anderson. Apart from that he has three top order batters who were absolutely awful international players before he became their captain and filled them with confidence, an aged Bairstow who is way past his best and fat with one working leg, and a bunch of nervous rookie bowlers who Stokes pretty much has to parent.

Only KP and Anderson would get into England's all time XI.

Cook might not be considered ahead of Gooch, Boycott let alone the Hobbs, Hutton, Sutcliffe etc.

An England test XI( from 1970 onwards) would be :-

Gooch
Boycott/Cook
Gower
Root
KP
Botham
Knott(wkt)
Flintoff
Swann/Underwood
Willis
Anderson

 

[Markhor]

Thats true but I personally don’t rate Strauss as highly as some other England captains, yes he was good at the job and very successful, but he really should have been — look at the players he had at his disposal. Batsmen who all averaged over 40 / near 50 and needed no coaching whatsoever, and vastly experienced bowlers who made their own plans and set their own fields. Strauss just had to stand at slip.

Start with Strauss himself. One of England’s best postwar openers.
Cook. Possibly England’s best ever opener. Probably gets into an all time England XI.
Trott. Gun number 3 in a historically problematic batting position for England.
KP. One of England’s best ever batsmen. Easily gets into the England all time XI.
Bell. Another world class batsman.
Flintoff. One of England’s best ever all rounders.
Prior. Wicketkeeper batsman who averaged over 40.
Swann. England’s best ever spin bowler alongside Underwood.
Broad and Anderson. Two of England’s best ever seam bowlers. Never get injured or miss a game. Anderson is basically the English Goat.

Stokes has nowhere near the calibre of player that Strauss had. The only world class players were Broad before he retired, and now it’s Root and a very old Anderson. Apart from that he has three top order batters who were absolutely awful international players before he became their captain and filled them with confidence, an aged Bairstow who is way past his best and fat with one working leg, and a bunch of nervous rookie bowlers who Stokes pretty much has to parent.

In the Strauss era Test pitches were flatter and the quality of global fast bowling wasn't as high as today.

It was easier to grind the opposition over 100+ overs which the Strauss team often did. It's just another in his long list of flawed arguments.

 

[Mamoon]

I repeat - the worst England captain I have ever seen.

He is the worst player of the lot too. Nasser, Strauss, Cook and Root were all better than him.

 

[Mamoon]

I won’t let the “Stokes is a big game player” propagate to cover up for his mediocre stats.

He has played 185 Test innings. Apart from 3-4, even his cult fans cannot recall a single innings of more and he must have played more than a 100 innings in what you would call “big games”.

In addition to this, he has been very average with the ball and hardly any notable and memorable spells. Maybe 1-2, that’s it.

Stokes the Test cricketer is one of the biggest frauds ever.

 

[Statpadder Inc]

I won’t let the “Stokes is a big game player” propagate to cover up for his mediocre stats.

He has played 185 Test innings. Apart from 3-4, even his cult fans cannot recall a single innings of more and he must have played more than a 100 innings in what you would call “big games”.

In addition to this, he has been very average with the ball and hardly any notable and memorable spells. Maybe 1-2, that’s it.

Stokes the Test cricketer is one of the biggest frauds ever.

That 135 is the only atg innings he's played in this format

 

[Ab Fan]

If he can't average 40 in Test cricket, he is not world class. That Headingley knock was outstanding but it was not chanceless and it didn't helped England retain the Ashes either.

 

[Mamoon]

That 135 is the only atg innings he's played in this format

He has played 3-4 great innings to be fair, but overall, he has been a nothing cricketer in this format.

He has failed too much and too frequently to be labeled a great cricketer.

 

[RidiculousMan]

Ben Stokes captaincy for you.

 

[Cricket Warrior]

Stokes hurting after defeat in Pakistan - McCullum

England captain Ben Stokes will be "hurting" after the series defeat in Pakistan, says coach Brendon McCullum.

The tourists were spun out in the second and third Tests to lose 2-1, the first time they have been beaten in a three-match series after going 1-0 up.

Stokes missed the first Test at the end of two months out with a hamstring injury, then managed 53 runs in four innings and went wicketless in the 10 overs he bowled.

"He's disappointed but he's our skipper and we know he's tough," said McCullum.

"He'll make sure he'll come back. It's our job to make sure we wrap our arms around him and help him along the way."

Stokes has endured a stop-start couple of years with his fitness. For much of 2023 his bowling was hampered by a long-term left knee problem.

He had surgery in November that year and was back to playing a full role as an all-rounder in this year's home summer, only to injure his hamstring playing in The Hundred in August.

The 33-year-old missed four Tests, including the series opener in Pakistan, which the tourists won.

He returned for the second - a defeat on a recycled pitch in Multan - then particularly struggled in the series decider in Rawalpindi.

Stokes scored 15 runs in two innings and did not bowl. On the second afternoon, Stokes' captaincy was unusually passive as Saud Shakeel compiled a century to give Pakistan control.

In England's second innings, Stokes was bizarrely lbw playing no shot to spinner Noman Ali.

England were ultimately skittled for 112, their lowest total in Pakistan, setting the hosts towards a nine-wicket win.

"He is disappointed, naturally," said McCullum. "We all know how competitive and driven the skipper is. He'll be hurting right now with how the series has unfolded.

"That injury was quite significant. He had to put in a lot of graft and subconsciously maybe you're not quite as screwed down as you can be in terms of decision-making. That's natural."

England have a short turnaround to their next tour, a three-Test series in New Zealand beginning at the end of November.

A squad is expected to be announced in the coming days, with few changes anticipated.

Leg-spinner Rehan Ahmed is likely to make way, possibly for a batter or wicketkeeper to cover for Jamie Smith, who will miss part or all of the tour for the birth of his first child.

The first Test is in Christchurch, the city where Stokes was born before moving to the UK at the age of 12.

"He'll be better for the run, no doubt," said McCullum, himself a New Zealander.

"It will be a couple of weeks off, freshen up and back to conditions which are a bit more similar to England. It's another opportunity for us."


BBC