Botham, Flintoff or Stokes?

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

The selectors of a post war England Xl have tasked you with filling the one all-rounder slot available. Who would you choose and why?

PS let's assume Derek Pringle is injured.

PPS My mistake to put this into the Bear Pit. Apologies!

 

[Guinness Boy]

The selectors of a post war England Xl have tasked you with filling the one all-rounder slot available. Who would you choose and why?

PS let's assume Derek Pringle is injured.

PPS My mistake to put this into the Bear Pit. Apologies!

I've moved it for you. If ever proof were needed of the "popularity" of the Gammon Pit, it's taken 5 hours for one of us to see this. Nevertheless, it'll only take a cheap shot by one of the Flintoff Massive to have us consider moving it back. Good job the question wasn't "what's the best sandwich for a cricket tea" or I'd have left it it in the Pit.

I will even try and add a poll for you.

The answer, by the way, is STOKES.

 

[blockhseagull]

At this stage Botham

Only due to him having the edge with the ball in his hand.

 

[studio150]

Tony Greig

 

[Braggfan]

At this stage Botham

Only due to him having the edge with the ball in his hand.

I could see Stokes maybe over taking him by the end of his career, because Stokes is fantastic. But so was Botham and he edges it for me (no pun intended).

 

[LlcoolJ]

Definitely Stokes.

 

[Left Footer]

Very difficult between Botham and Stokes, but Beefy edges it for me as a slightly more consistent bowler.

 

[blockhseagull]

I could see Stokes maybe over taking him by the end of his career, because Stokes is fantastic. But so was Botham and he edges it for me (no pun intended).

Quite possibly correct, it’s a horrible comparison to have to make because they are both world class cricketers.

Stokes clearly the better batter, Botham clearly the better bowler.

 

[happypig]

Beefy for me.
Quite what Flintoff is doing in this poll is beyond me...

 

[Gwylan]

Tony Greig

Yeah, not sure why he's been left out. He was a far better batsman than Botham and Flintoff (and better than Stokes, although that may change). He's clearly the weakest of the four bowlers but still worth mentioing

 

[Berty23]

I would pick Botham as a bowler! I would then pick stokes over flintoff due to batting.

 

[Eeyore]

Stokes over Botham. Now, anyway.

Stokes is much the better batsman. Botham was unreliable for large parts of his career. If you take his record out against New Zealand and India his average drops into the late 20s. Even his hold over Australia is a myth once you take out the 1981 series.

Botham is better with the ball, mainly because he had more variation and could open if needed. Stokes isn't an opening bowler but is still getting better. His status is that of a batting all-rounder and he must be averaging comfortably over 40 in the last couple of years.

I didn't really consider Flintoff. Quality player on his day but not in the same bracket as the other two. If you consider Flintoff then you have to look at Trevor Bailey.

Tony Greig comes out top stats wise, but Stokes now runs him close.

 

[GT49er]

All three are/were of their time - as were Fry, Rhodes, Bailey and Dexter. It's just not always realistic to compare what happened in different eras.

 

[Sorrel]

What a question. Depends what form they are in... certainly not Botham if he's going to be captain.

Much as I love Botham and Flintoff I think it has to be Stokes, if he's fit.

 

[Ooh it’s a corner]

As there are 11 players in the team I’d pick Botham AND Stokes from the options given - I loved watching AWG though - and all brilliant fielders too - just natural talent, Fred too tbf.
If you insist on one I think it links to how the rest of the team is balanced - Botham’s bowling prob swings it for me!

 

[Mackenzie]

Stokes for me, though all fantastic players in their day.

 

[Braggfan]

Quite possibly correct, it’s a horrible comparison to have to make because they are both world class cricketers.

Stokes clearly the better batter, Botham clearly the better bowler.

I think that's a really good summary. And you're right it is horrible to compare them and try and pick who's best. It's probably better to just acknoweldge how great Botham was and just enjoy watching Stokes try to beat his achievements.

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

Beefy has that extra off-the-field bit about him that makes him just edge out Stokes' affray.
Both able to turn a game with either bat or ball.
If Stokes can carry on his current form for a few more years that may swing it to his favour
Flintoff was never consistent enough and too easily put himself on the pedalo [and beach]

 

[The Mole]

Stokes has just taken over for me (I’m trying not to consider Brexit!)
Like Botham he wins matches. He is just such a good batsmen in many different circumstances and the best fielder. Botham was a better wicket taker though. Flintoff is probably the best bowler of the three but not in the same category of batsman

 

[Pavilionaire]

Tony Greig's test batting average was 40.43 compared to Flintoff's 31.77, while Greig's wickets came at 32.20 apiece, compared to Flintoff's 32.78.

Greig also snaffled 87 catches, compared to Flintoff's 52, Greig beats him on most tons (8 to 5), best bowling figures, 10 wickets match hauls, he was a better captain than Flintoff, he faced some demon bowlers too Lillee, Thomson, Hadlee, Roberts, Holding, Garner, Imran Khan etc.