England tour of India, Jan 25 - March 11

[sussexpob]

Massive gift that. Indians get mixed up and there is a run out... Jadeja wanted a single for the 100, Safaraz nearly run himself out 2 balls before, and then completes the job scond time round.

[mikesiva]

Jadeja gets his century!

[Arthur Crabtree]

Recalling Wood was a good idea. Got the run out too.

Still a lot of runs.

[Durhamfootman]

yes, there was an opportunity, after the Rohit wicket, for England to get on a roll, but Sarfaraz seems to have scored quickly to snuff it out.

[GarlicJam]

Rohit gets his century!

I had been thinking the past week that Rohit was showing the form this series what I expected of him as a test player when he was appointed captain - not a great deal. Good to see him turn that around here and get a century when India really needed it.

[bigfluffylemon]

Stokes has had a much more consistent impact over his whole career. Flintoff's record outside 2004-05 is pretty ordinary - if you discount their 2 best years Stokes' has a better batting and bowling average by several points, more hundreds, more 5-fers, more runs, more wickets , more catches per match. About the only metric Flintoff wins on is wickets per match, but that's largely a function of bowling more overs per game - Stokes has a better strike rate. And outside 03-06 I'm struggling to remember a game that Flintoff really had an impact at all. Lord's 2009 I guess

Did Ben ever find himself bowling to Hayden, Langer, Ponting, Clarke, Hussey, Symonds and Gilchrist in the same match, then faced up to Warne, McGrath, Lee, Clark and DIzzy when coming out to bat? Does Ben's record v WI, which is his best team to bat against, include facing up to Ambrose and Walsh with the ball, or did he ever bowl to Lara or Chanderpaul? Did Ben ever have to bowl to Sehwag, Tendulkar, Dravid, Ganguly and Laxman, who could actually bat away from home unlike now (And who statistically are very slightly better at home as a unit than even the undefeatable post 2010 Indians).

Did Ben have to face up to Pollock, Donald, Ntini and Steyn when playing South Africa then bat against a great line up featuring all time greats (as a comparison, 12 batters in Flintoff's span averaged 40+ for SA, in Ben's span its 2, and 1 is the same - ABDV... the other Amla averaged dead on 40, and 39.8 in Flintoffs era, so really we can say 11 more quality bats and 2 the same for Flintoff).

Did Ben ever score a run against a Sri Lankan team with Murali on all innings? Did he ever bowl to a Sri Lankan team that included world class talent like Sangakka, Jaywardene, Samawaeera or P Da Silva? Has he ever played Pakistan against a peak Shoaib Akhtar, Asif, Saqlain or Waqar? Or had to bowl to Yousuf, Inzi, peak Younis Khan?

The quality of players in Flintoff's era are beyond compare to Stokes. If Stokes had carted around Shane Warne like he was a county trundler during a series he averaged 19 and took 40 wickets, then I'll tell you he's a better bat.

But who did Flintoff perform against? Did he face Murali? Yes. Did he cart him around? No, in 9 tests against SL, he got past 33 once with more than half of his scores single digits. What about Pakistan? Career average of 20 in 3 tests - yes that attack featured Akhtar, but the rest of it was such luminaries as Mohammad Sami, Naveed ul Hasan and Danish Kaneria. He never faced Asif, Saqlain or Waqar. The West Indies - did Flintoff face Ambrose and Walsh? Once, scores 12 and 16. That 167*? Scored when the West Indies attack was that all time great line-up of Corey Collymore, Jermaine Lawson, Pedro Collins and Dwayne Bravo. His other hundred against the West Indies on a pitch so flat that a certain B Lara made 400*, and against a similarly rubbish attack. New Zealand - the only other side Flintoff averages more than 30 against other than WI and Australia - who did Flintoff face - Chris Cairns, Chris Martin, Ian Butler, Nathan Astle. Wow. Did he face Donald? Once. Result - out before 20.

Did Flintoff score 250 in a day against South Africa? Did he play the greatest ever innings by an Englishman? Did he have to bowl to Steve Smith, Virat Kohli or Kane Williamson? Did he pick apart the all time greatest New Zealand bowling attack who were at the time World Test Champions? Did he face Bumrah, Shami, Ashwin and Jadeja, the statistically best Indian attack ever, in India? Did Flintoff have to face Mitchaggedon and score a ton? Did he have to face Rabada, Philander, Morkel, Ngidi? Did he play the innings that brought home two World Cups? No, he got pissed and fell off a pedalo. There were great players in both eras, but to claim Flintoff's career is better because the players in his era were better is cherry picking, IMO. You can do it either way, as I just did.

Flintoff's exploits during the 2005 Ashes were incredible, and at that time he was the best cricketer in the world. I never denied that. But that series seems to rose-colour how good people view his entire career. That amazing 2003-05 span, he played a heavily declining West Indies and a very weak New Zealand. How many other series did he really mix it up with the best in the world? SA 2003 and 04/05 and India 05/06 IMO. Maybe West Indies 2004 while Lara was still there with the ball, but their bowling was poor. His other great series were against weak opposition, and against most of the great bowlers you listed above, he either never faced them or failed.

And I never said Stokes is the best allrounder in the world over his career. Jadeja and Shakib have probably both been better. But neither was Flintoff - Kallis was the better allrounder then, barring 2005.

Flintoff was the better bowler. No doubt there. But better bat? He made 2 overseas hundreds in New Zealand and West Indies, against rubbish attacks. Stokes has scored hundreds in South Africa, India and Australia, against strong bowling attacks. Is Stokes' record perfect as a bat? No. But unless you want to claim 2005 trumps everything (and let's not forget the two best batting performances in that series just happened to be when McGrath was injured), claiming Flintoff is the better bat despite massively inferior stats because he faced 'better players' is ignoring the context of who he actually batted and performed against.

I'm obviously not going to convince you, but when you take the complete package of bat, ball, fielding and captain over the career, I'd have Stokes as the better allrounder. If you're taking peak performance, well, probably nothing will ever equal Fred in 2005. Although that 138* comes close...

[bigfluffylemon]

Also, you say it was harder to bowl in the 2000s than 2010s in support of Flintoff's bowling performance as averages have gone down, but you can't have it both ways. Stokes higher batting average comes in an era when statistically it was harder to bat than Fred's career, which surely by that logic magnifies the difference even more (and further doesn't support the claim that Flintoff faced better bowlers).

[bigfluffylemon]

Quick wickets this morning - England have a chance to keep India below 400.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Tail wags a bit though. England in a tough spot.

[Durhamfootman]

I woke up to the headline "England finally hold onto a catch"........... which is not very encouraging

331-7 becomes 417-9

as I understand it, England have dropped 3 catches in this innings and also not reviewed a couple of lbw not out decisions that would probably have been overturned by the third umpire. Whilst these things happen all the time in cricket, it does mean that England are going to have to bat exceptionally well when it's their turn

[Durhamfootman]

445 ao

[bigfluffylemon]

445 ao

[sussexpob]

Duckett 50 off 38 balls.....

Got to love Bazball

[bigfluffylemon]

Duckett 50 off 38 balls.....

Got to love Bazball

[bigfluffylemon]

Hundred for Duckett off just 88 balls.