Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to johnstevens77,Bhoddhisatva,scotia,Anonymous,Cornytiv34, for Donating to support the site

stokes selected vs india

Please create a thread for your favourite topic.
jackdaww
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2081
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 11:53 am
Has thanked: 3203 times
Been thanked: 417 times

stokes selected vs india

#160412

Postby jackdaww » August 18th, 2018, 8:30 am

it seems no one here has commented so far .

from what i have seen and heard , the man seems to me to be a cowardly thug .

should he be playing ?

should there be a ECB disciplinary hearing ?

Leothebear
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1447
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:18 pm
Has thanked: 219 times
Been thanked: 825 times

Re: stokes selected vs india

#160424

Postby Leothebear » August 18th, 2018, 10:33 am

He's not a likable character that's for sure. Aggression clearly is a big part of his make-up and that has to complement his qualities and a world class all rounder.

He was found not guilty but he has a fair bit of "previous" so I'd hope this would be his last chance.

So yes, I think he should play but with the equivalent of a suspended sentence, that if invoked would end his test career.

LTB

Ashfordian
Lemon Slice
Posts: 995
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 5:47 pm
Has thanked: 168 times
Been thanked: 160 times

Re: stokes selected vs india

#160433

Postby Ashfordian » August 18th, 2018, 11:04 am

jackdaww wrote:it seems no one here has commented so far .

from what i have seen and heard , the man seems to me to be a cowardly thug .

should he be playing ?

should there be a ECB disciplinary hearing ?


Yes. He was playing before the verdict when he was not guilty so I don't see why this test should be any different when he is still not guilty.

I think his punishment of missing the Ashes was enough but he would be on a final warning if it was my decision.

SalvorHardin
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2049
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 10:32 am
Has thanked: 5297 times
Been thanked: 2465 times

Re: stokes selected vs india

#160442

Postby SalvorHardin » August 18th, 2018, 11:34 am

jackdaww wrote:it seems no one here has commented so far .

from what i have seen and heard , the man seems to me to be a cowardly thug .

should he be playing ?

should there be a ECB disciplinary hearing ?

Yes. Ben Stokes has been found innocent in a court of law and he has already been punished by the ECB by not being picked for the Ashes series. I think that Jos Buttler or Adil Rashid should have been dropped, not Sam Curran, but that's another matter.

Unfortunately most of the journalists who have reported on this case don't seem to understand some key points of English law, in particular what constitutes self-defence, that the standard of proof for a criminal case is "beyond all reasonable doubt" and that just because the prosecution or the police says that something happened this does not mean that it actually happened.

Much of the media coverage has been misleading, with many news reports (and newspaper articles online) showing the mobile phone footage of the fight but leaving out the first ten seconds (because doing so makes Stokes seem to be the instigator of the fight). This footage clearly shows that the fight was started by Ryan Ali by hitting one of the gay couple with a bottle and Stokes reacted by punching him (which is self-defence in English law). Juries generally take a dim view of people using weapons against unarmed people and will consequently give the attacked much greater leeway when deciding what constitutes self-defence when they retaliate. Here's the full footage

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rwu50NnCIBA

There's a thread in Beerpig's Snug where the case has been discussed. Some of us have pointed out the massive holes in the prosecution's case.

viewtopic.php?f=29&t=13166

The Secret Barrister has an excellent summary of the case as seen by an outsider

https://thesecretbarrister.com/2018/08/ ... ent-wrong/

didds
Lemon Half
Posts: 5244
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:04 pm
Has thanked: 3244 times
Been thanked: 1018 times

Re: stokes selected vs india

#160772

Postby didds » August 20th, 2018, 3:05 pm

My 2p FWTW. Muchly in line with the generalised TSB article really - i wasn't there, am aware that what videos and reports there have been are not always the full video/story but have nothing else to go on blah blah blah.

So - he was not found guilty (as opposed to found not guilty etc). That's our system. If we don't like it we need to push for our elected representatives to change it. Whether such changes will ultimately be "better" is a separate debate.

We have a top flight national representative who was not found guilty of doing anything wrong. A free man.

The rest is trial by media, social media and the chattering classes.

As for his selection .. we can see that Curran "only" got selected because Stokes didn't. So with Stokes available why should he not get his place back that he was relieved of for the court appearance? On the other hand of course, why should Curran step down given his excellent performance, and not a lesser performing player (two obvious choices already mentioned).

If I had to stick my neck out I'd say

* he was not found guilty. time to move on.
* Curran's non selection is disappointing.

WRT any ECB actions against Stokes - that would depend on the contract wording of his employment. If there are no curfews or other terms/requirements he has breached then - for me - he has nothing to answer for. If its a generalised "taking the game into disrepute" then the ECB are on a sticky wicket (see what I did there) wrt actions done for the protection of others : would the ECB potentially be saying "if you see someone being attacked you must do nothing and let the attack continue"?


didds

Itsallaguess
Lemon Half
Posts: 9129
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:16 pm
Has thanked: 4140 times
Been thanked: 10023 times

Re: stokes selected vs india

#160774

Postby Itsallaguess » August 20th, 2018, 3:08 pm

didds wrote:
If I had to stick my neck out I'd say

* he was not found guilty.


If I were Stokes, I think I'd very much prefer "he was found not guilty".....

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

didds
Lemon Half
Posts: 5244
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:04 pm
Has thanked: 3244 times
Been thanked: 1018 times

Re: stokes selected vs india

#160777

Postby didds » August 20th, 2018, 3:11 pm

Itsallaguess wrote:
If I were Stokes, I think I'd very much prefer "he was found not guilty".....


I agree :-)

didds

didds
Lemon Half
Posts: 5244
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:04 pm
Has thanked: 3244 times
Been thanked: 1018 times

Re: stokes selected vs india

#161162

Postby didds » August 22nd, 2018, 8:33 am

Notwithstanding England's general abject performence i this test, i suppose that relatively speaking anyway, Stokes justified his selection... and also Butler and to some degree Rashid as well maybe.


Eng 1st dig
Butler 39 (highest score)

India 2nd dig
Rashid 3 wickets (highest return)

Eng 2nd dig
Butler 100
Stokes 62
Rashid 30 no

That'snot to say Curran woulnd't have emulated any of those, and I would share the discomfort over his non selection (leaving aside the reasons for Stokes non appearance in the 2nd test)... but all the players that were mentioned in our brief discussions over who gets to be picked all in some way have featured. OK, Rashid 30 no in the 2nd dig is too little too late - but he is batting at 9 and as a bowler did no worse and someways better than others.

didds


Return to “Sports Bar (all sports)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests