Ben Stokes vs Ravi Ashwin

[Athlai]

I think Woakes is a better allrounder than Stokes to be honest. Stokes has a slight edge with the bat, but Woakes a bigger edge with the ball.

Nooooooo way.

 

[Teja.]

I think Stokes has the edge in a fight to death with no weapons allowed.

 

[cnerd123]

Ashwin is one of the best bowlers in the world at the moment but shouldn't bat higher than 8, he wouldn't be the worst seven but he isn't about to play on his batting alone.

tbf Stokes isn't getting into England on either his batting or bowling alone.

 

[Zinzan]

Stokes is twice the batsman Ashwin is. It isn't even close.

Possibly more of a gap in the batting than I was suggesting, I can accept that, but the shoe is on the other foot with the bowling.

Let me ask you another way. How would you rate their respective batting and bowling skills each out of 10?

 

[Zinzan]

Nooooooo way.

I rate Woakes so highly, I genuinely think he could be the first English Test cricketer since Botham, to finish up averaging over 30 with bat and under 30 with ball. Time will tell.

 

[ImpatientLime]

They both average 34 with the bat in both Test & First Class cricket, so I'm not really sure the batting gap is quite as big as you're making out, even though If forced to choose I would say Stokes is the better bat, mainly based on his ability to be more destructive.

I do think the gap in their bowling is quite a bit wider though, even if it is apples vs. oranges. Ashwin is among the top 2-3 spinners in the world currently (if not the best), whereas Stokes wouldn't even be in the top 10 pace bowlers.

heh.

all of ashwins centuries have come against the west indies.

stokes has hit the following....
- at perth versus johnson and harris
- under grey skies at lords v southee and boult
- and that insane 258 smashathon in south africa

stokes will clearly surpass ashiwn in the batting stakes in the next 12-18 months.

 

[ImpatientLime]

I think Woakes is a better allrounder than Stokes to be honest. Stokes has a slight edge with the bat, but Woakes a bigger edge with the ball.

contrary for the sake of it, i see.

 

[Zinzan]

contrary for the sake of it, i see.

Not for the sake of it at all, I said the same in the Stokes vs. Woakes thread a few months back.

 

[marc71178]

tbf Stokes isn't getting into England on either his batting or bowling alone.

Definitely makes it on batting and for me as a 4th seamer he gets in as well.

 

[TheJediBrah]

Ashwin is one of the best bowlers in the world at the moment

*when bowling on rubbish pitches

Even not taking batting into account, Stokes is a better bowler alone in normal conditions.

 

[Black_Warrior]

You know you have me to thank for this entertainment. And that goes for the rest of you ****s as well

 

[cnerd123]

Definitely makes it on batting and for me as a 4th seamer he gets in as well.

I can see an argument for batting based on recent form, but given how he started with the bat and England's options I dont think he gets in overall. And if we use recent form to justify Stokes getting in as a pure bat, then Ashwin gets in too - he had twin 100s vs the West Indies and that fear alone has earned Rohit Sharma a whole Test career.

I agree on 4th seamer, but England's best XI doesn't feature 4 pure bowlers. If not for his batting, Stokes would be a fringe fast bowler trying to break in.

 

[cnerd123]

*when bowling on rubbish pitches

Even not taking batting into account, Stokes is a better bowler alone in normal conditions.

"I can't score runs, the pitch must be rubbish"

 

[Zinzan]

heh.

all of ashwins centuries have come against the west indies.

stokes has hit the following....
- at perth versus johnson and harris
- under grey skies at lords v southee and boult
- and that insane 258 smashathon in south africa

stokes will clearly surpass ashiwn in the batting stakes in the next 12-18 months.

I'm aware of all of those innings, which is the reason I give an edge to Stokes over Ashwin with the bat in spite of them averaging the same. Stokes can be really destructive on his day. I still feel the gap between their bowling is much bigger, which puts Ashwin marginally ahead as a Test allrounder as of this current moment. The reason I say 'allrounder' as opposed to just better cricketer, is their batting records both put them in the all-rounder category.

 

[Mike5181]

Stokes is probably a slightly better bat and as a bowler he's probably better than the stats suggest, but Ashwin is a ****ing beast at home. Like legit ATG numbers. He's got a bit of work to do to outweigh that.

 

[Zinzan]

Definitely makes it on batting and for me as a 4th seamer he gets in as well.

Just to clarify, you're saying he one of the top 5 or so Test batsman in the country, forgetting his bowling?

 

[Zinzan]

I can see an argument for batting based on recent form, but given how he started with the bat and England's options I dont think he gets in overall. And if we use recent form to justify Stokes getting in as a pure bat, then Ashwin gets in too - he had twin 100s vs the West Indies and that fear alone has earned Rohit Sharma a whole Test career.

I agree on 4th seamer, but England's best XI doesn't feature 4 pure bowlers. If not for his batting, Stokes would be a fringe fast bowler trying to break in.

Yeah I'm with you, I can't see Stokes getting in as either a specialist bat or specialist bowler if he didn't have both skills. I think suggesting so is to suggest England don't have more than 3-4 batsmen who could average late 30s-40+ at Test level batting in the top 5 or 6, I think they probably do.

 

[OverratedSanity]

Stokes is miles ahead of Ashwin as a batsman. Clear example of career averages flat out lying.

Overall, it's close,but I think Stokes potentially can be a matchwinner in all conditions, while for Ashwin, he will never truly be able to win matches on his own outside the subcontinent. Such is the nature of finger spin. Total beast in the SC though. England probably wouldn't swap Stokes for Ashwin, but theyd love to have Ashwin in their side. Same for India and Stokes.

 

[ImpatientLime]

Just to clarify, you're saying he one of the top 5 or so Test batsman in the country, forgetting his bowling?

you've seen our middle order, right?

 

[OverratedSanity]

heh.

all of ashwins centuries have come against the west indies.

stokes has hit the following....
- at perth versus johnson and harris
- under grey skies at lords v southee and boult
- and that insane 258 smashathon in south africa

stokes will clearly surpass ashiwn in the batting stakes in the next 12-18 months.

Tbf, Ashwin averages almost 50 with the bat vs England, with a 91* and made runs vs Australia too. But yes, Stokes clearly is a better batsman.