4th Test: South Africa v England at Centurion on Jan 22-26, 2016

[Buzzard Breath]

Give it a rest Antilag we are tired off it. On and on. Move on and and talk about last nights action in a construction manner or bother another thread.

 

[ANTiLAG]

Give it a rest Antilag we are tired off it. On and on. Move on and and talk about last nights action in a construction manner or bother another thread.

You're very sensitive.

Try to remain objective and coherent please and build a proper argument.

 

[chigurh]

I reckon Ben is probably a good guy.

So he meets all the requirements to be a kiwi cricketer.

 

[ANTiLAG]

So he meets all the requirements to be a kiwi cricketer.

That does appear to be the stereotype that is developing around here.

 

[Buzzard Breath]

You're very sensitive.

Try to remain objective and coherent please and build a proper argument.

I am not going to bother. Plenty of people have made good points the last few pages and you have picked them apart and overlooked them to suit your own agenda. While missing their points.
Once again you are raving on about crap and derailing the thread.

What point do I need to make again? Talk about last nights action in the test or go away. Read it twice if you don't understand it.

 

[ANTiLAG]

I am not going to bother. Plenty of people have made good points the last few pages and you have picked them apart and overlooked them to suit your own agenda. While missing their points.

This is an incredibly poor synopsis of someone wanting a number 6 batsman to average more than 34, ideally 40 or more, and not being all that impressed by a bowler averaging 39, especially given them taking the up #6 batting spot. This is a debated issue as both a matter of theoretical difference, 6 bats, 4 bowlers and a wk, or 5 bats, 1 batting allrounder, a wk, and 4 bowlers (where #8 may or may not be a bowling allrounder), as much as it is about Ben Stokes' own performances.

What point do I need to make again? Talk about last nights action in the test or go away. Read it twice if you don't understand it.

So how about Ben Stokes' batting last night? :lol:

Sometimes in life you will find people disagree with your opinion. You can either have a well reasoned debate, or you can act in the manner that you have.

 

[Buzzard Breath]

This is an incredibly poor synopsis of someone wanting a number 6 batsman to average more than 34, ideally 40 or more, and not being all that impressed by a bowler averaging 39, especially given them taking the up #6 batting spot.




So how about Ben Stokes' batting last night? :lol:

Sometimes in life you will find people disagree with your opinion. You can either have a well reasoned debate, or you can act in the manner that you have.

I am not impressed by a bowling avewrage of 39. Don't you think I want to get lower? He has the talent to do it.
I haven't acted in any manner. If you think that then your intelligence is warped and stupid. Plenty of people on here have stated that Ben Stokes has achieved a lot at the age of 24 in an inconsistent career that has the possibility to get better. Yet you overlook that constantly and rant on about his current averages. Averages can get better.

 

[Hutty1986]

:lol: thats a pair for AB, Anderson gets him second ball!!

 

[Twizzle]

I think its a bit silly to be talking stats regarding Stokes' career as its too early in his career to be comparing him to people who are at the other end of their career.

Some people just get so carried away with stats and in this situation it can be very misleading.

They will no doubt change as his career matures.

 

[ANTiLAG]

22 tests and 89 FC matches.

It is a fair sample.

But hey - argue on 'potential' over statistics. It works for Channel 9 discussing Mitchell Marsh's batting.

But at some point, unless retiring on their own accord, some selector will say, look his stats suggest that this guy is not reaching his 'potential' often enough, or they will determine that the person's potential is in fact as displayed by output (measurable by statistics), below the standard desired and either way conclude that it is time to try someone else for the good of the team. Shane Watson beceomes a walking lbw, as a consequence his batting average decreases.

If you don't think 34 with the bat and 39 with the ball is good enough to play number 6, then his numbers better vastly improve, because he's been carried for 22 matches so far with that output. England have invested in him. But his first class batting statistical record has me in doubt how much he can actually improve his batting output over his career. For all the hooplah about his match winning performances - he averaged 28 last year with the bat in 14 matches. His bowling average? 47.79.

But hey, maybe he can find a bone floating in his foot like Chanderpaul and turn it all around.

But from where I'm sitting, he is currently losing more games for England than winning them. So while he hits the occasional breath taking century, or rips out a top and middle order with a five for, it is just not occurring often enough to convince me of his 'sublime potential value' of having another better more orthodox batsman in the top 6.

And as for my opinion on selection, if I was selecting Australia - M Marsh would not make the side with his batting. And I doubt that Ben Stokes would make my England test side. I'd be looking for a better batsman. He of course walks into an English pyjama squad but for tests, I repeat, I would be looking at better batsmen.

And as much as statistics can improve for players after 22 matches, they can also get worse.

But hey, he has started 2016 with a hiss and a roar, maybe "he has turned a corner" in his career. I'll have a look in 19 or 22 more tests, if he continues to play and be selected.

 

[Iafeta]

Rabada... wow. 20 years old, and nails a 13-fer. Great potential this young fellow.

 

[Pete Cash]

Yeah looks a good talent. Another side puts in a comedy collapse away from home. Luckily england had wrapped the series up

 

[ANTiLAG]

Rabada... wow. 20 years old, and nails a 13-fer. Great potential this young fellow.

Fit, fast and tireless.

Bowled mid 140's in India, impressive there despite him not getting wickets in the tests. He got wickets in the ODI's, though. He hasn't been giving away easy runs so far, which is really rare for a novice international bowler bowling at his pace. Even in India he was a miser. He was tonked in the 2nd test against England, but he's had the better of them the last two tests.

Gives South Africa a further problem in selection.

Pretty hard getting Steyn, Morkel, Philander and Rabada in a team with a spinner. And Piedt is the best prospect they've had in a while. Plus there is Abbot.

Does not look like De Lange is going to get much test cricket for a while. Poor guy.

South African selectors must be tempted to go 1980's West Indies in selection of 4 seamers, when Steyn and Philander are fit and firing again. Elgar can play the Carl Hooper role, though Duminy wasting his batting talent is possibly a better fit.

 

[ANTiLAG]

And while Ben Stokes is capturing headlines right now, I am still not completely sold on him. He is still batting at 34 and bowling at 39 for his career. He can be a match winner, sure, but that same aggressiveness can lose matches when it does not come off.

Jonny Bairstow avoided a pair; Ben Stokes needed strapping around his chest after being struck by Morkel. Both were committed to attack. England had a chancy feel about them. Bairstow managed to get out twice in successive balls. Rabada overstepped for the first, as Bairstow hacked at a wide outswinger to be caught at slip, then the batsmen edged again, a more conservative push this time, de Kock taking the catch.

The daftest shot fell to Stokes - the Man of the Series, often an inspiration with bat, bowl and in the field, but daft all the same as he pulled a short one from Morkel to deep square leg. More than any other England batsman, attacking cricket is in his nature, but he had been suckered.

And so it went on. Another go-down-guns-blazing swing of the bat...

http://www.espncricinfo.com/south-africa-v-england-2015-16/content/story/965611.html

By often, the author means 3 centuries in 41 innings.

Not exactly a Matt Prior type (who batted 7, below Stokes #6 spot) just yet, is he? Knowing when to onslaught and when to bat all day for a win or draw?

I am fairly sure Stokes has more breath taking centuries to slog out and some more Man of the match awards to collect. But batting with the batsmen and the tail, that is Bairstow and Rashid/Ali's problem for a little while longer.

 

[JJ]

Rabada... wow. 20 years old, and nails a 13-fer. Great potential this young fellow.

He does

Talk of RSA's demise perhaps premature, but as with the Ashes, job done and the Poms knock off early

 

[ANTiLAG]

He does

Talk of RSA's demise perhaps premature, but as with the Ashes, job done and the Poms knock off early

RSA's batting frailty is the problem (and inability to find a quality spinner). Piedt may be in fact become a good spinner now but Faf cannot buy a run of late and Duminy has never realised his potential. Graeme Smith is proving difficult to replace with his premature retirement (Kallis was expected to retire), and Elgar, Bavuma and Van Zyl have not set the world ablaze with their batting performances so far.

No one doubts their ability to keep producing an endless supply of high quality seam bowlers. From Donald, Pollock, Nitini, Steyn, Morkel, Philander just to pick the biggest names now through to Abbott, Rabada and even De Lange, the machinery just keeps producing.

Must be something in the water they're drinking on all those Australian tours because that is similar to Australia in a couple of ways to a few years ago. So many fast bowlers and not a spinner, and the batting looking thin. Although Australia think that they have solved their batting issues.