Ben Stokes

[sussexpob]

Stokes asked not to be selected for the T20 world cup..

Can't help but feel an all format retirement might be coming shortly.

[Durhamfootman]

I'm confused as to whether Stokes is still retired from ODI's. He came back for the WC, but I don't know whether that was just a one off, or not. I haven't heard any commentary on this since. I think everyone in, around and reporting on the England camp is still pretending that the WC debacle didn't happen

[andy]

Stokes asked not to be selected for the T20 world cup..

Can't help but feel an all format retirement might be coming shortly.

Na he won't retire from tests, he loves it too much, i think he's made the right decision to step away from T20's long thought he was more suited to odi's than t20's and the way his knee is im happy to see him step away from t20 cricket

[alfie]

Stokes asked not to be selected for the T20 world cup..

Can't help but feel an all format retirement might be coming shortly.

I suppose there is always a risk that an ageing player - especially one who puts as much force into his game as Stokes - will at some point find he is unable to continue to resist the restrictions of chronic injury conditions. So if he were both unable to resume bowling , and be struggling in other aspects of his game , then Stokes might indeed have to call it quits.

But I don't see any sign of that at present. Opting out of the short stuff in order to prepare himself for bowling in the red ball format makes plenty of sense (I wish he had elected to do so last year instead of coming back for the ODI Cup !) And he did actually get back to bowling , albeit briefly , in India recently ; which suggests full fitness might not be far away. It does take time to recover completely from surgery and many sportsmen probably try to get back into action a little sooner than they ideally should...suspect Stokes is one in that category ; but the rest he is currently enjoying will hopefully see him in rather better shape this northern summer.

No guarantees but I am a lot more optimistic than you on this one , Sussex - at least for the immediate future. How long he will be able to continue is another matter and one on which I would be just guessing...but you could probably say that about most players as they progress through their thirties...

Apart from Jimmy Anderson , of course

[sussexpob]

I suppose there is always a risk that an ageing player - especially one who puts as much force into his game as Stokes - will at some point find he is unable to continue to resist the restrictions of chronic injury conditions. So if he were both unable to resume bowling , and be struggling in other aspects of his game , then Stokes might indeed have to call it quits.

But I don't see any sign of that at present

I am not sure that the "if" applies anymore, Stokes "is" not bowling, and "is" struggling with the bat; we have already reached this point, and have for sometime.

In the last 3.5 years, Stokes has averaged 30 in test cricket with bat, and 34 with ball, both showing noticeable decline on his peak. Its hardly like this period is not significant or represents temporary blips in form.... it accounts for 35% of his total test career. This is a sustained, long term drop in output. And that's before you look at the data in any detail; he for instance averages under 27 in 71% of series played vs the top 3 ranked sides he's bat against, and in high scoring series he bucks this trend he doesnt stand out over others (6th best average in the two series he did well in). He also the only England regular not to have averaged over 50 in multiple series. It gets worse with his bowling, where he averages between 53 and 124 in series against the top teams (discounting the India series he bowled 5 overs in). Even the average series like v West Indies, he was well down the average list for the series, and v Pakistan he averaged 34 but that ranked dead last of England bats.

I think its fair to say Ben is no longer an allrounder, but a specialist bat.... and a very underperforming one over a very long stretch of test matches. He just averaged 19!! in his last series, so its hardly like its getting better. I would imagine this has to be considered his worst series of all time. In an objective world based purely on merit, the conversation shouldn't be when does Ben retire.... it should be why hasnt he been dropped. I apprecaite it doesn't work like that in reality, but his play has been really poor for a long time. And with no bowling output, his usefulness in the side is questionable.

Is it likely a near 33 year old who has spent 18 odd months not bowling due to prolonged fitness issues, will suddenly recapture enough fitness and quality to become an all-rounder? I think "bowling again" for Stokes will be throwing the odd half run up over into the equation when a partnership forms, I very much doubt we will ever see him bowling 10 overs in an innings ever again unless the situation on the field is a smouldering wreck. And the batting form is a real worry.

And I guess deep down, what are we actually hoping he becomes again? The highest batting average he ever recorded was 37.... its not like we are waiting for Lara or Tendulkar to come back from the dead and become the best player ever again...we are pretty much waiting for an injury crocked Jacob Oram to come back from his cricketing death, and return to being a pretty good allrounder who occasionally slogs a 100.

[Arthur Crabtree]

I'll remember Stokes as a player who very occasionally touched upon the miraculous, rather than a consistent, dependable stalwart. Which means he will be remembered.

[sussexpob]

I'll remember Stokes as a player who very occasionally touched upon the miraculous, rather than a consistent, dependable stalwart. Which means he will be remembered.

The two innings in his career that stand out from 2019 (WC Final and Headingley test) were totally freak occurances that included unbelieveable luck. Dropped catches, missed simple run outs, plumb lbw not given, fielders losing site of balls in the air and misjudging simple catches into 6s... and then in the ODI game, which England didn't actually win (it was a tie in both 50 overs and super over, and given on tournament wicket countbacks) he was caught out by a man who subsequently fell over the boundary rope, and the famous run out turning into 6 runs when he hit his bat is something you can spend 100 years not seeing again. England would have needed 9 from 2 balls with two tailenders at the crease had Stokes not hit it (which of course, was a total accident).... in the counter, he dished up one of the worst overs in cricket history to lose England a world cup the bookies had already stopped taking bets on them winning, so it goes both ways.....

Stokes is remembered as a man of these monumentous innings, but in actual fact he has only scored a 100 in 6 matches England won. In only 2 of those, did he make England's top score. One was a blasting of a hapless Windies team by an innings (and where Don Sibley scored a century, as a mark of how terrible they were), the other was the 2019 Ashes test. His top score in test cricket was on a pitch where England scored the 11th best team innings in history... South Africa followed it with their 5th best score ever.... it was one of the flattest pitches in the history of the game (it might even be statistically the worst).

I guess as a mark about how overblown Stokes' ability to conjure up match winning wonder is, the Guardian's list of his five most memorable performances to commemorate his recent 100th test match, listed Rawalpindi 2022 as his 5th most memorable performance. Ben scored 41 runs of nearly 1000 England posted in the match, and took 1 for over a 100..... which is quite frankly, not very memorable at all.If after 4 attempts, you are down to sub par batting on a historical deck, and taking 1 wicket out of the 20 England took to win the game, I would strongly assume there wasn't much inspiration on the list of candidates.

The Guardian remember his spririted effort on a lifeless pitch leading Englands attack to an unlikely victory; he bowled 7 of Englands 156 overs in the first innings when everyone toiled on a pancake in 30 degree heat, then was out bowled by everyone in the second innings. Anderson and Robinson took 4/50 and 4/36 respecitively... Stokes 1/69. He gave away nearly 4 runs an over, the others 1.5 and 2.27 respectively.

I think that sums up Stokes. Even then he does nothing, people remember him doing a lot. He had a rubbish test match, but the press tell me its a historical effort.

[Durhamfootman]

one of the great players, for me

[alfie]

Ah well Sussex , I know you and I will never agree on Stokes so we will just have to watch and wait.

I do have to point out though that you are cheating a bit with those figures : picking "the last 3.5 years" to show pretty underwhelming stats rather conveniently includes 2021 - which was a particularly poor year for Ben with both bat and ball. If we look instead at "the last 2.5 years" (surely a more accurate barometer for assessing overall decline ? ) those figures improve to 33.7 (bat) and 31.3 (ball). That is still not great - though the batting figure is obviously brought down by the recent tour of India where he had a shocker. But I would suggest that while he has obviously struggled to bowl for some time , there is not any clear evidence that his batting is in terminal decline.

And really that was the thrust of my initial post. It remains to be seen whether a short break and a concentration on red ball will restore Stokes to a role as a fully effective all rounder. I am (possibly over optimistically ?) hopeful it will ; but surely it is at least possible ? I know you don't really like Stokes much and I have to suspect this somewhat colours your view of him as a cricketer , but I would hope you as an England supporter are not actively wishing for him to flop and depart the scene ? Not as if a ready made replacement all rounder is breaking the door down...

This doesn't negate all your argument , true. I agree with Arthur he is more "sporadic genius" than consistent excellence. But I reckon his value to England is far greater than you are allowing. So once again we will probably have to agree to disagree (fancy that !)

I am going to wait and see what happens in July .

[sussexpob]

I know you don't really like Stokes much and I have to suspect this somewhat colours your view of him as a cricketer , but I would hope you as an England supporter are not actively wishing for him to flop and depart the scene ? Not as if a ready made replacement all rounder is breaking the door down...

I am not sure why arguing against the legacy that Stokes enjoys in the game should be seen as overtly negative. We have to remember that the widespread view of Stokes is he is a generational all-time legend, its not like the opposite side of my view is Stokes is a competent professional or even really good; its that he is the best player in the world, or best player of his era. And while I concede that arguing against that proposition requires me to dismantle some of his achievements or to fight against the mythical elements of some of his contributions, let's not confuse that with dislike of Ben as a person or as a cricketer. If someone wanted to posit that Ben was a good cricketer, I am not insane! I would, and do, agree. But the question is never posed in that way, so it is also never answered that way.

Very few players deserve to be considered in the pantheon of greats that Stokes is universally considered part of. I had the pleasure of watching Jacques Kallis at his peak; he has 32 more centuries than Ben, averages 20 more with the bat, and is a statistical equal with the ball; that to me is greatness. It would be verging on madness to even begin to compare Ben Stokes to Kallis as an equal. Stokes record in the game is nowhere near that level.

I do have to point out though that you are cheating a bit with those figures : picking "the last 3.5 years" to show pretty underwhelming stats rather conveniently includes 2021

Around this time in Stokes' life and career, he is quite vocal about the need to change his priorities and work/life balance. His father became ill in 2020, and he pulled out the test series with Pakistan to travel to NZ to visit him. He then went directly to the IPL in UAE where he played in an extended harsh quarantine bubble that he was vocally critical about. His father died while he was at the tournament, and in his own words he fell out of love with the game, because he says the demands of always playing and having to be about cricket, cricket, cricket all the time meant that he had been prevented from taking time to be with his father in his last days, something that he regretted. Stokes then took time away from the game in 2021, and pulled out the IPL auction for the following year, citing the need for a break. He has since said this was due to mental health problems.

It is clear that that his career/life enters a new period after that Pakistan series, one where he acknowledges that he could simply not maintain the intensity and work-rate of what he was doing up till that point, and that doing so adversly affected his personal life and health. At some level, his motivation and priorities as a person changed, and that is something he has said, not me.

I think its a key part of answering the question about whether he can break the cycle of decline. His decline becomes noticeable at the same time he takes a step back, its instantaneous and he hasnt really had a period of consistent form that recaptures his end of the 2010s peak. It seems sensible to assume considering the reasons for his "step back" being about things like mental health, that he will go back to basing everything about cricket .... pulling out the T20I, not bowling, not playing the IPL... this looks a further step back to me.

[sussexpob]

It remains to be seen whether a short break and a concentration on red ball will restore Stokes to a role as a fully effective all rounder. I am (possibly over optimistically ?) hopeful it will ; but surely it is at least possible ?

I listen to a lot of sports podcasts while cooking or working, and I would say that one consistent thread that retired legendary players talk about in interviews about their careers, in terms of what is required to meet the demands of top level performance (and its consistent across all sports), is having the sheer determination and motivation to continually put your body and mind through the brutal processes that prepare you to perform at the highest level. Those processes get more difficult with the passing of time, and in every sense - A 33 year old at the top of their sport has probably spent 20 years of their life waking up when its cold and dark every morning and dragging themselves out for a run. Then following it up with several hourstechnical work. Then going to the gym for strength training. Doing this every day for 20 years gets harder and harder.

I listened to Shannon Sharpe, a three time NFL superbowl winner and hall of famer the other day talk about it. He was asked what made him great; he responded by saying being a terrible husband, being a terrible father to his children, never going to a family birthday party, never celebrating his own, being a bad friend. He said he didnt know a single elite player who wasnt the same. Its a sacrifice you need to make to be always at the best level of preparation. You never miss training. You don't stop. He said the moment he did, he declined rapidly and retired.

That is the element that makes me doubtful about Stokes ability to get back to where he was. He made a choice a few years ago that being that person who was solely focused on cricket was something he could not maintain. It wasn't sustainable. It effected his mental health. His performances, as I have argued are clearly declining since that choice (although you disagree) do seem to operate in parallel with that drop in his intensity. And there can be no surprise with that.

If youu compare the same person as a 25 year old who is hell bent on working as hard as he can, with a point to prove and the confidence and arrogance of youth, and with a career and a bank balance to forge, and then have them base their entire life around hitting the ball better or being as good as they can... and then compare them to the same person as a 33 year old who can no longer put himself through that insane workload, who now has two young children and a wife to care about besides cricket and simply doesnt have the time to always be about cirkcet, who has more money than most people dream of.... which do you think is likely to be a better elites sportsman? And lets remember, at 33 your body recovers slower. The injuries of the past start to make you ache or take away your peak power or ability to be quicker, stronger, fitter. You might to start to lose your reaction speed or eye-sight... The bottom line really is, for the 33 year old to be physically comparable to the 25 year old version, the 33 year old has to work even harder to combat ageing. That is another consistent point you find retired people making. People still in elite sports by 35-40 are working more than they ever did, and still might decline in output and be worse as players for it.

Resting and playing less in itself has no positive effect. Quite the opposite in fact, resting unless we are talking about recovering after a period of intense physical activity in the short term, would just make you lose fitness and match sharpness. It will make you decline technically when not playing. And as stated, the older you are, the harder you then need to work to get back up to the level you once occupied at peak performance. Resting is only useful in a way that it allows a sportsperson to put themselves once again through that brutal process. It gives you the motivation to be able to work harder, or in theory can. So yes, if we say he missed a tour but came back with more energy, and said "ill wake up at 4am instead of 5am for that run now"... yeah, it can improve you, and yes, its essentially for all sportsman to avoid burn out to have that rest period now and then.

So really, the question boils down to a simple one.... is it possible, or likely, that Ben Stokes at 33 can go back to doing what Ben Stokes at 25 was doing to prepare himself for top level sport, knowing that the pressure and intensity of doing that lead to him more than once quitting the game at various points with mental health problems, and him expressing the fact that this made him hate cricket, and that he needed to stop being that person?

Possible? Maybe. I dont know if form a bowling perspective if the injuries have left a permanent problem in his ability to bowl long spells or affected his pace. As a batsman, its possible with a lot of hard work.

Is it likely.... ??... Close to 0%. He literally said he can't be that person he once was, and what we are seeing is him pulling out off cricket and saying he needs to rest. If we take the 5am alarm clock going off for tht daily run and workout to start, this is akin to turning it off and going back to sleep. It wont make you a better player, and will make you worse.

[sussexpob]

Just as a clarification to the above comments....

1. This should not be read as a critcism of Stokes professionalism or effort. Every single sportsman eventually reaches a point where the demands become too great to force themselves through.... we are talking about an amazingly high level of dedication and performance, one that I could only aspire to in my dreams.

2. Ben owes nothing to English cricket, and I would defend his right to decide on what he wants to do with his life or career. So long as he is good enough (or anyone) to retain his place on merit, he should be afforded all the flexibility in the world to take personal time out the game or a mental health break.

3. Comments relating to Ben's mental health are made in good faith, and are in no way a criticsm of his condition