Ben Stokes vs Ian Botham

[Howe_zat]

He'd need to have a full-fledged seam bowler's career on top of what he's already doing. Bit of an ask.

Consensus from a few years ago isn't that Stokes is a better batsman than Beefy, and by a good long way in the short forms, but the bowling job doesn't compare. I don't think that's changed in the interim, if anything it's more pronounced.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Early days yet, but it's looking like Sir Ben might edge captaincy from Lord Beef of Brexitonshire.

 

[Tom Flint]

Bowling avg to stay the same and 250 wickets.
20 tons, low 40s average and lead us to no 1 in world and he will be comfortably above ian

 

[subshakerz]

He'd need to have a full-fledged seam bowler's career on top of what he's already doing. Bit of an ask.

Consensus from a few years ago isn't that Stokes is a better batsman than Beefy, and by a good long way in the short forms, but the bowling job doesn't compare. I don't think that's changed in the interim, if anything it's more pronounced.

If Stokes improves as a bat can he make the bowling difference?

 

[GIMH]

Stokes is a better limited overs player, seems to be a better skipper. If he doesn't drop over the next few years he will have longevity over Botham too.

Botham had a ridiculous peak, much better bowler, and was born on God's own peninsula.

It's a tough one.

 

[Calm_profit]

Stokes is not a strike bowler like Botham was,in batting Stokes is just ahead,in terms of fielding it's close.

 

[Nintendo]

If Stokes can get his batting average above 40 without his bowling dropping off too much it would be a closer discussion.

 

[Xuhaib]

Is he comfortably ahead of Flintoff leave aside Botham?

 

[Howe_zat]

Is he comfortably ahead of Flintoff leave aside Botham?

For me yes, I would still take Flintoff on bowling alone but Stokes has achieved more and been an invaluable player for much longer.

 

[Nintendo]

Is he comfortably ahead of Flintoff leave aside Botham?

Easily. Flintoff had some good peaks but stokes has as many wickets at an equal bowling average and is a far better bat.

 

[Adders]

Is he comfortably ahead of Flintoff leave aside Botham?

Gotta be the same story......not as good bowler but definitely a better batsmen?

Flintoff nailed an Ashes series, thus far Stokes has nailed an Ashes test, but a World Cup too. I think Stokes will smoke Freddie by the time he's finished but it's close now imo.

 

[GIMH]

Peak Flintoff was a better all-rounder than Stokes who has never really had that level of consistent performance across both disciplines over an extended period like Flintoff. But Stokes is a much better batsman, stays fitter, and appears to be a far superior captain too.

Flintoff was legit the best fast bowler in England for a few years though and Stokes, despite I think having a better average, has never been as good with the ball as Sir Freddie.

 

[Uppercut]

I'd take Stokes purely because he gets on the field a lot more. I don't think that's a luck thing. He does huge amounts of conditioning work in an effort to stay injury-free, and I seriously doubt that Flintoff did.

If you discount injuries then I'd take Flintoff. Gap in bowling is larger than the gap in batting imo.

 

[GIMH]

Yeah if Flintoff took care of his conditioning the way he does now during his career, he could likely have played another 40-50 Tests. or even just continued his white ball career.

I think overall you're right about the gap in disciplines, but I don't think Flintoff could ever have played an innings like Stokes at Headingley, or in South Africa etc. Then again Stokes could never bowl a spell like Flintoff at Edgbaston 05, lords 09 etc.

One thing is for certain, yes I'm the Freddie mark round here, but he was the best white ball all-rounder of the three, that's for sure.

 

[Howe_zat]

Yeah if Flintoff took care of his conditioning the way he does now during his career, he could likely have played another 40-50 Tests. or even just continued his white ball career.

I think overall you're right about the gap in disciplines, but I don't think Flintoff could ever have played an innings like Stokes at Headingley, or in South Africa etc. Then again Stokes could never bowl a spell like Flintoff at Edgbaston 05, lords 09 etc.

One thing is for certain, yes I'm the Freddie mark round here, but he was the best white ball all-rounder of the three, that's for sure.

Definitely think that undersells Stokes' bowling a bit. He probably doesn't have an Edgbaston 05 in him but he has bowled some Lord's 09. His four-for in the last test where he dismissed a class batsman with a peach before coming back later on to dismiss the tail is pretty much that imo. Stokes also has things like getting Williamson and McCullum out in successive balls and his mammoth spell to keep Australia in sight at Headingley.

 

[GIMH]

Definitely think that undersells Stokes' bowling a bit. He probably doesn't have an Edgbaston 05 in him but he has bowled some Lord's 09. His four-for in the last test where he dismissed a class batsman with a peach before coming back later on to dismiss the tail is pretty much that imo. Stokes also has things like getting Williamson and McCullum out in successive balls and his mammoth spell to keep Australia in sight at Headingley.

Yeah all great spells but maybe I just rate Flintoff's Lords 09 (last day)_bowling higher than you do because it certainly wasn't meant as a knock on Stokes

 

[Zinzan]

Stokes is closer as a Test allrounder to Chris Cairns than Flintoff & both Cairns and Stokes are superior Test allrounders than Flintoff for me.

 

[andruid]

Ben Hollioake

 

[Flem274*]

I don't think they'd end up competing for one spot tbh. Flintoff makes the best pommy side I've seen on bowling alone, Stokes tilted towards batting.

So I guess Flintoff by traditional standards but I'm starting to not believe in those.

 

[BazBall21]

Stokes beats Flintoff imo but Freddie was definitely the better bowler. Doubt Stokes will ever be rated as high as Botham.