Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

At least the debacle today inspired one of Bob Willis' trademark rants on The Verdict! Predictable but still entertaining - " unacceptable ... disgraceful"

Making_Splinters wrote: I wouldn't see a problem with describing the collapse as pathetic, to bottle it after the openers had, for once, done a decent job is simply not acceptable when you have a middle order of Stokes, Root and Bairstow. I rarely agree with, Sussex's ire towards Stokes, but his approach was frankly irresponsible and hugely disappointing from someone who had just the Test match before played a mature an match winning hand

My personal view is that Stokes has been mollycoddled with good will for so long, you will have to get used to these types of fluttering innings from him. Its clear that after KP left the team, the England management sold Stokes as the next maverick, swashbuckling batsman to attract the masses to buy tickets. Not that its his fault, I am often attached to the Stokes hating camp but if anything I hate the process and overtly OTT press treatment of his talents more than its personal to Stokes. I see it as just another ECB engineered press propaganda project. When the team were in disasterous times, write about the talent and courage of one guy, avoid the subject.

Stokes has been completely seperated from criticism, and I think that this knocks on even at our level of debate. Without a suitable top level narrative, you can see that many posters are unwilling to target him of criticism. And as shaded on by Mike, what he was allowed to get away with post T20 final was really unsavoury, that the English press (a) didnt destroy him for one of the biggest failures in a clutch situation I have ever witnessed in sport and (b) that they printed a rather lengthy character assasssination of those involved against Stokes, on the basis that Stokes could never be wrong. Its pretty sickening.I feel at times a bit like Winston Smith in 1984, that I live in a world of BS where no one criticises Big Brother, or no one really gets that they should.

The problem is, Stokes has a history of being reckless and clearly has discipline issues. Yet while the press are on the "say nothing bad about him" shtick, and neither are most fans, then you are increasingly seeing that he believes the attitude he plays with is acceptable. The fact that Bayliss supported him after the ODI series I think is the last straw. We have seen in this test that his behaviour has been poor, but why should he feel he needs to change? He goes out and gets pissed with the A team, he gets kicked off tour but still makes the international team right after... where he punches a locker and cant play, but he's picked when he's fit. And he throws away a world cup and well, that just happens Ben, chin up son, and the Windies are all nasty people and they are really to blame!!

The main worry is that this attitude and hype follows the team. There seems to be a consistent thread that England pretend they have hardened and tough cricketers, and this is manifested in this over dramatic handbags style machoism that seems to suggest if you call someoen a d*ckhead after they hit you for a boundary, you are in some way showing you have the mental capacity for test cricket. This winter we are seeing Bairstow chatting a lot, Stokes chats a lot, even the timid Buttler lost his mind and reverted to it.

And yet, for all the chest out fist pumping aggression they exhibit, yesterday Ben Stokes got one ball from Shakib cause him an issue, and he went sprinting to the hills waving a white flag. The manner of which he did that was in the most faux macho way possible, trying to then slog everything, but to me that doesnt cover up what was happening. Stokes had lost his nerve, and rather than double down and fight for his wicket, he chose to throw it away. He couldnt handle the pressure.... just like the world cup final, he fell apart. And watching that coming in next, what does that do? The whole attitude of the team after was the same. They seen the Talisman running and they ran with him.

In fact, there are an increasing amount of instances that show to me that Stokes is nothing but an calm seas player. And deep down there is a guy with little confidence in his ability, trapped in the hype of his superhero billing. When times go badly, he becomes superior and questions other opposition attitudes. When times go right, its all him

Bhaveshgor also asked me yesterday about Stokes ability against spin. It seems disputed that Stokes is either lousy against spin, or good against it.

From yesterday, I have a feeling that Stokes is perfectly comfortable with off spinners. Mehedi bowled well to him this series, but Stokes has simply hung on the back foot and punched with the spin into the off side. When against Shakib, Stokes has looked far more uncomfortable, and rather than hang on the back foot, we have seen far more paniced attempts to get down the pitch and smother (unconvincingly), or a tendancy to leave the feet planted and attempt to reach for the ball.

I have a feeling Stokes is completely lost with leg/left arm orthodox spin, because his leg side game playing with the spin is far less convincing. A few times I have noticed as the spinner drifts into his pads, he has failed to flick it low risk into the leg side and pick up singles. In fact, he's missed out a few boundaries in this series with rank leg side balls Cook would smoke.

If you look at his test history.... his hundreds....

The Lords test vs NZ..... faced most of innings to an off spinner.
South Africa 200..... Dane Piedt, off spinner
Perth.... Lyon- off spinner who bowled a lot to him that innings.

Compare this to the leg spinners he faced

Bishoo... one game, got him out
Benn... one game, got him out
BD's two left arm spinners..... accounted for all of his dismissals in the series despite Mehedi taking nearly half of the England wickets in the series.
Yasir Shah... only time he bowled to him, he got him out early for 12
Kane Williamson ... one of Williamsons six wickets in the last 4 test years, Stokes lasted all but 4 balls

Typically annoying that Cook should criticise the spinners for the poor series. In my view, the top order batting was the very least of England's performance in the series.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Typically annoying that Cook should criticise the spinners for the poor series. In my view, the top order batting was the very least of England's performance in the series.

No question about that AC and it's disingenuous of Cook to single them out as he did. Another cliche from Bayliss " we must do better" sounds like my old headmaster. Now there's talk of extra spin options.

What do we make of Mehedi? Next big thing or flash in the pan?

Little stat I have just picked up.

The last Test v Bangladesh was the first Test in 119 English Test matches to not include a Nottinghamshire player.

Wonder which county now holds the record. Maybe Essex.

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Wonder which county now holds the record. Maybe Essex.

Yorkshire must be up there.

No players around 2008. Cook goes back to 2006.

Between 1990 from Alec Stewart debut to Mark Butcher retiring at the end of the South Africa series in 2004, there was a continued Surrey presence in the team for over 170 tests.

Id have to guess this is a record, as Stewart/Atherton and Cook are the only people to have not missed a test match for England in over 50 games

Essex are still a good shout because Gooch and Hussain follow on from each other in back to back 100 test careers. Maybe if you traced it youd find a longer period here?

Atherton and Flintoff/Anderson all link, but they missed too many games. Around the late 90s Flintoff was dropped a lot and Atherton missed a lot of tests at the end. There are gaps.

365notout wrote:What do we make of Mehedi? Next big thing or flash in the pan?

I'll wait to see how he does outside of Asia before making a judgement.

Fascinating blog. http://cricviz.com/2016/10/mehedi-magic ... d-england/

sussexpob wrote:Bhaveshgor also asked me yesterday about Stokes ability against spin. It seems disputed that Stokes is either lousy against spin, or good against it.

From yesterday, I have a feeling that Stokes is perfectly comfortable with off spinners. Mehedi bowled well to him this series, but Stokes has simply hung on the back foot and punched with the spin into the off side. When against Shakib, Stokes has looked far more uncomfortable, and rather than hang on the back foot, we have seen far more paniced attempts to get down the pitch and smother (unconvincingly), or a tendancy to leave the feet planted and attempt to reach for the ball.

I have a feeling Stokes is completely lost with leg/left arm orthodox spin, because his leg side game playing with the spin is far less convincing. A few times I have noticed as the spinner drifts into his pads, he has failed to flick it low risk into the leg side and pick up singles. In fact, he's missed out a few boundaries in this series with rank leg side balls Cook would smoke.

If you look at his test history.... his hundreds....

The Lords test vs NZ..... faced most of innings to an off spinner.
South Africa 200..... Dane Piedt, off spinner
Perth.... Lyon- off spinner who bowled a lot to him that innings.

Compare this to the leg spinners he faced

Bishoo... one game, got him out
Benn... one game, got him out
BD's two left arm spinners..... accounted for all of his dismissals in the series despite Mehedi taking nearly half of the England wickets in the series.
Yasir Shah... only time he bowled to him, he got him out early for 12
Kane Williamson ... one of Williamsons six wickets in the last 4 test years, Stokes lasted all but 4 balls

Williamson is an offspinner.

Interesting analysis though.