O/T Stokes for Curran?

[ramAnag]

According to Sky Ben Stokes is likely to replace Sam Curran for the 3rd Test.
Not at all sure about the wisdom of this.
I like Ben Stokes, he’s a very fine cricketer. He’s also, imo, extremely fortunate not to be behind bars.
That having been said he was found ‘not guilty’ and has, imo, been punished enough via the loss of his endorsement contract and his Ashes place etc.
On the other hand both Sam Curran and Chris Woakes have come into the side and excelled. Woakes clearly cannot be dropped after his Edgbaston performance but I cannot recall a time when a twenty year old has made a bigger more promising impact on the England cricket squad.
Let Stokes win his place back by all means, but he has to take his chance when the opportunity arises imo and not at the expense of a young star in the making who has done absolutely nothing wrong. Thoughts?

[MadAmster]

Has he been playing in, and excelling in, County Cricket? If so, it may be justified. If not he has to fight for his place.

[Ram59]

I agree with you there RA, any further punishment should wait until after a disciplinary hearing and not before.

Questions do need to be asked about the court case however. Like why 2 principal witnesses weren't called and the fact that video footage was widely shown on news programmes before the case was heard.

[ramAnag]

I agree with you there RA, any further punishment should wait until after a disciplinary hearing and not before.

Questions do need to be asked about the court case however. Like why 2 principal witnesses weren't called and the fact that video footage was widely shown on news programmes before the case was heard.

Yep...a bit further O/T, but I’ve never understood those things about the court case either and the CPS seems to need to take a good look at itself too.
I was called as a juror once...can’t believe how disorganised and expensive that system is.

[mistaram]

According to Sky Ben Stokes is likely to replace Sam Curran for
the 3rd Test.
Not at all sure about the wisdom of this.
I like Ben Stokes, he’s a very fine cricketer. He’s also, imo, extremely fortunate not to be behind bars.
That having been said he was found ‘not guilty’ and has, imo, been punished enough via the loss of his endorsement contract and his Ashes place etc.
On the other hand both Sam Curran and Chris Woakes have come into the side and excelled. Woakes clearly cannot be dropped after his Edgbaston performance but I cannot recall a time when a twenty year old has made a bigger more promising impact on the England cricket squad.
Let Stokes win his place back by all means, but he has to take his chance when the opportunity arises imo and not at the expense of a young star in the making who has done absolutely nothing wrong. Thoughts?

RA the only reason he's not behind bars is because some numpty at CPS doesn't know the difference between common assault and affray Terrible decision

[Geoff Parkstone]

the only logical thing to do is to replace Buttler with Stokes and have Stokes effectively playing as a batsman only since 5 seamers and a leggie would be over the top. If the wicket doesnt look spin friendly then maybe replace Rashid but that's a bit risky and the Indians showed the folly of a misshapen attack at Lords.

So the question is, does stokes deserve a place solely on the strength of his batting over Buttler (or arguably Pope, but that makes little sense). i'd say "no".

Hence I think he must be patient and wait to get back in. Not as a punishment, but simply due to the fact that on current form there are better players in the team

[ramAnag]

the only logical thing to do is to replace Buttler with Stokes and have Stokes effectively playing as a batsman only since 5 seamers and a leggie would be over the top. If the wicket doesnt look spin friendly then maybe replace Rashid but that's a bit risky and the Indians showed the folly of a misshapen attack at Lords.

So the question is, does stokes deserve a place solely on the strength of his batting over Buttler (or arguably Pope, but that makes little sense). i'd say "no".

Hence I think he must be patient and wait to get back in. Not as a punishment, but simply due to the fact that on current form there are better players in the team

See your point, but Buttler has just been made vice captain so maybe not. Otherwise quite agree...he ‘must be patient and wait to get back in’.

[Ram59]

RA the only reason he's not behind bars is because some numpty at CPS doesn't know the difference between common assault and affray Terrible decision

Don't you need a complainent to prosecute for assault, in this case the injured party was also in the Dock. Apparently the CPS did try to add further charges, but were too late.

[mistaram]

Don't you need a complainent to prosecute for assault, in this case the injured party was also in the Dock
. Apparently the CPS did try to add further charges, but were too late.

Yes your right they did leave it to late and the Judge wasn't having it Yes. your right about a complanent but to layman surely seeing someone KO somebody else and get of Scot free doesn't seem right Infact the whole case doesn't seem right as you say why were not the gay couple called to give evidence after all they were the essential part of Stokes defence

[Geoff Parkstone]

Yes your right they did leave it to late and the Judge wasn't having it Yes. your right about a complanent but to layman surely seeing someone KO somebody else and get of Scot free doesn't seem right Infact the whole case doesn't seem right as you say why were not the gay couple called to give evidence after all they were the essential part of Stokes defence

That would probably have been way too stressful for the poor dears