Stokes or Flintoff?

Sobers took 235 wickets in 93 matches. Stokes has 197 in 95 matches. Kallis took 292 wickets in 166 matches and he's considered one of the best ever.

Botham was an exceptional bowler but he bowled over 3500 overs. Stokes has bowled just over 1900 so from a bowling strike rate perspective, they are almost equal. 57 for Beefy, 58 for Stokes.

Stokes is a batter who bowls a bit (mostly poorly)

Flintoff was a gun bowler

Don't like the like for like stats with different players from different eras.

Someone playing against teams with viv Richards, Gordon grenige, zaheer Abbas, Javed miandad etc isn't going to have the stats that someone playing against Scotland and Bangladesh will.

Stats never tell the full story, especially with all rounders who largely try to impact the game with innings or wickets in big moments rather than taking stacks of wickets or scoring stacks of runs.

Scotland don't play test matches and Stokes has played against Bangladesh twice. Its not like he's stat padding against them.

To me the best ever all rounder is Jacques Kallis, followed by Sobers.

Then you’ve got the Big 4 from the 80s; Imran, Botham, Kapil Dev & Hadlee in some order. I’d probs have Imran 1st and Dev 2nd out of that bunch.

Those are the great all rounders. Maybe Jadeja or Cam Green will work their way to that elite group.

Stokes is in the group with the likes of Mitch Marsh, Lance Klusenar etc.

comment by #LiquidGenius (U20571)
posted 13 minutes ago
To me the best ever all rounder is Jacques Kallis, followed by Sobers.

Then you’ve got the Big 4 from the 80s; Imran, Botham, Kapil Dev & Hadlee in some order. I’d probs have Imran 1st and Dev 2nd out of that bunch.

Those are the great all rounders. Maybe Jadeja or Cam Green will work their way to that elite group.

Stokes is in the group with the likes of Mitch Marsh, Lance Klusenar etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If Marsh was as good as Stokes aussies probably would have won every ashes since 13/14. What are you actually smoking? Also Hadlee is better than Kapil Dev, probably Botham too.

If Marsh was as good as Stokes aussies probably would have won every ashes since 13/14
————————————

They pretty much have lol

Certainly in terms of match wins to losses

Stokes is by fat the better batsman. Flintoff was the better bowler and imo was a better bowler than his stats suggest. Flintoff wasn't that great for that long though.

Just seen this post so I am adding my bit a little late. As a genuine all-rounder, Botham has been England's best. He was dangerous with the bat and often used as a front line bowler. He was a far better attack bowler than either Freddie or Stokes.

In my opinion, Stokes is better than Flintoff, especially with the bat, he's just more consistant and has changed more games. We also have to consider that as a bowler, Stokes does the selfless containment role - the ugly overs in the middle when the pitch is doing little. He's often used as a partnership breaker. He's carrying so many injuries for the fact that he's often selflessly bowled long spells in bad conditions which is not an easy thing to do for any fast bowler. He's also turning into an inspired captain.

I do think though, that Flintoff was a great player who would flourish in the setup England have now. His stats, which are excellent by the way, were largely from a time we played a very restricted form of test cricket until that exciting period we had circa 2005. However, neither he, nor England maintained that.