Ben Stokes - All the facts

[GotSpin]

lmao only 5500 posts after almost 6 years

If you have less than 10k are you even worthy?

 

[SillyCowCorner1]

Paranoid much?

 

[Burgey]

I think that unless you’ve made 5,000 posts, you shouldn’t be allowed to post at all.

 

[mr_mister]

Yeah I agree, you should be forced to make your bones/cut your teeth in the coaching and equipment sub forum til you hit 5000

 

[Burgey]

And not allowed to post new threads until you hit 10k

Once you get above 50k, you should have the power to edit and delete other posters’ contributions, and to hand out bans of any length you think appropriate on those who have <50k posts.

 

[TheJediBrah]

I think that unless you’ve made 5,000 posts, you shouldn’t be allowed to post at all.

Cant fault this logic

 

[Spark]

Why would it be exactly the same way?

Typical illogical internet child post and why I don't bother posting on forums. One bloke scapegoated, the other with a huge number of unforgivable controversial and disgraceful incidents against him ...One player won the world cup, 2005 ashes and other key series..one lost the world cup

But don't let the facts and my comments get in the way of your agenda..

Most likely won't post here again as a pathetic number of high post count members, truth clearly hurts for you that Ben Stokes is a disgrace to the game of cricket

You live on here with 26,891 posts and still making illogical troll posts. Laughable. You love hiding behind your internet tough guy persona so much you live on here. Truly pathetic

 

[Zinzan]

Haven't been following this closely, are British bookies offering odds on whether Stokes will be selected or not? And if so, what a short-odds on?

 

[Zinzan]

I'd have preferred the waitress tipping scene from Reservoir Dogs.

 

[mackembhoy]

I'd have thought the criminal proceedings will likely be over now. CPS won't want to be seen defending a perceived hate crime.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/47843...e-after-defending-them-from-homophobic-thugs/

 

[eempyrean]

I'd have thought the criminal proceedings will likely be over now. CPS won't want to be seen defending a perceived hate crime.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/47843...e-after-defending-them-from-homophobic-thugs/

And the excuse takes this long!

He was the aggressor, on the attack. Even if it is true, you have no right to attack people that's opinions are different to yours. You can't take the law into your own hands.

This is the same bloke that bullied a disable kid on social media and took an age to apologise. Sceptical at best and even if true his actions aren't appropriate or unacceptable. He'd be jailed if he was a regular bloke.

As for Ali, England have a squad photo and he's the only player not wearing a poppy. The ICC stepped in once to intervene with Ali making political statements via visible bands during matches. ICC told ECB he wasn't allowed political items during matches, after ECB laughably allowed it. Here is another hole ECB and Ali have dug themselves into.

 

[Moonsorrow999]

Yeah he'd be locked up years ago, England seriously cannot jestify sending him, would be an utter disgrace given all that he has done, agree with the Pietersen comparison as well, Stokes makes Pietersen look like a goody two shoes! Hope the vile yob gets banned for a bit by the ECB, obviously won't happen but there we go.

 

[marc71178]

And the excuse takes this long!

He was the aggressor, on the attack. Even if it is true, you have no right to attack people that's opinions are different to yours. You can't take the law into your own hands.

This is the same bloke that bullied a disable kid on social media and took an age to apologise. Sceptical at best and even if true his actions aren't appropriate or unacceptable. He'd be jailed if he was a regular bloke.

As for Ali, England have a squad photo and he's the only player not wearing a poppy. The ICC stepped in once to intervene with Ali making political statements via visible bands during matches. ICC told ECB he wasn't allowed political items during matches, after ECB laughably allowed it. Here is another hole ECB and Ali have dug themselves into.

Dear God, the chip on your shoulder about this is worse then the North Eastern contingent’s collective chip. Never thought I’d see the day.

 

[S.Kennedy]

That is certainly an unique pair of trews the one on the left is wearing.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/47843...e-after-defending-them-from-homophobic-thugs/

They look like my aunt's old leggings.

 

[S.Kennedy]

Why is Moeen Ali not wearing a poppy? It is a non-political commemoration of war dead. Pakistani veterans of the India Army commemorated 11th November and they were Muslim.

 

[Adders]

And the excuse takes this long!

He was the aggressor, on the attack. Even if it is true, you have no right to attack people that's opinions are different to yours. You can't take the law into your own hands.

This is the same bloke that bullied a disable kid on social media and took an age to apologise. Sceptical at best and even if true his actions aren't appropriate or unacceptable. He'd be jailed if he was a regular bloke.

As for Ali, England have a squad photo and he's the only player not wearing a poppy. The ICC stepped in once to intervene with Ali making political statements via visible bands during matches. ICC told ECB he wasn't allowed political items during matches, after ECB laughably allowed it. Here is another hole ECB and Ali have dug themselves into.

The whole debate and I guess legal point here is if Stokes went too far after he disarmed the bloke trying to go at him with a bottle. But there is no way at all you can describe him as the "aggressor" from the video footage we've all seen ffs.

 

[marc71178]

Why is Moeen Ali not wearing a poppy? It is a non-political commemoration of war dead. Pakistani veterans of the India Army commemorated 11th November and they were Muslim.

Why does it matter if he does or doesn’t? He may well have a reason why he chooses not to.

 

[S.Kennedy]

Why does it matter if he does or doesn’t? He may well have a reason why he chooses not to.

I do not suppose it does matter but I'm sure you, defending the poppy's absence, will be able to manufacture an argument out of it as you could create an argument with a plastic bag.

 

[vcs]

Ah, must be that time of the year again, the poppy nonsense has started.

 

[91Jmay]

Couldn't care less about Moeen wearing or not wearing a poppy. It long ago became a political tool for the most boring scold's in society to thought police people with.

Stokes does gain credit if the homophobia angle is true, but he still went far more onto attack than defense. I wouldn't take him although I've no problem with him dealing with the coward who came at him with a bottle.

I love how the OP mentions himself as a YouTube commentator, he has brought those debating skills in abundance.

Peter Lalor raises an interesting point, not sure Stokes should go to Australia if he has an issue with homophobia.