Ben Stokes suddenly making himself available for the World Cup raises several questions – if he was so adamant about retirement why did he un-retire himself?
Was there pressure from the board and the captain? If that was the case why retire when you know they need you?
Was it a selfish decision or a smart decision for himself considering his body and his fitness so he could prolong his Test career?
Last year when he announced his retirement from the ODI format which he had dominated it came at a time when England’s white ball teams were going through a transition with Eoin Morgan’s retirement and Jos Buttler taking the captaincy in ODI as well as T20Is.
You could sense that it was something unexpected and England really weren’t ready for it.
Manage, strategise & dominate. Download Wicket Cricket Manager today!
England director of cricket Rob Key and Buttler had chats with Stokes to take the retirement back so he could be available for the World Cup in India which gets under way in October, but Stokes was adamant that he would not back down.
In cricket whenever a cricketer announces his retirement it’s meant to be emotional as well for their fans, their families and the team.
It also creates chances for the younger players to show their potential and take their place. But the problem here arises when that particular player comes back.
England chose to go back to Moeen Ali for the Ashes when Jack Leach was injured, which was unfair to younger spinners who thought their chance had arrived.
When AB de Villiers requested to captain Faf du Plessis and the Cricket South Africa board to come out of retirement for the 2019 World Cup, the directors declined his offer since they were developing players and to remove one them and put De Villiers in would just be unfair to them.
In Stokes’ case, Harry Brook has had to sacrifice his place.
Ben Stokes (Photo by Alex Davidson/Getty Images)
Brook has missed the World Cup squad because Stokes is going to play as a specialist middle-order batter – very frustrating for young Harry.
Pakistani legend Shahid Afridi is another player who was well known for retiring then coming back – he did it five times in the final 11 years of his career.
Bangladesh’s Tamim Iqbal retired from international cricket for nearly 48 hours before their cricket board chairman Nazmul Hassan and Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina talked him around.
Players can always take a break from a format and inform the selectors about their plans. Doing a U-turn on a retirement isn’t fair for the team which is trying to look to the future and the young players who get sidelined, particularly when there’s a huge event coming up like the World Cup.
Bobbo7
Roar Rookie
Proven big game performer. No brainer. Even if NZ was morally cheated in the 2019 WC.
jammel
Roar Rookie
If I were England, I'd play both Brook and Stokes. Probably it would be Roy that gives away - depending on form though. Ie: 1JohnnyB 2Buttler+ 3Root 4Brook 5Stokes 6Moeen then the rest
BigGordon
Roar Rookie
I've no problems with players un-retiring, but have huge issues with how this process works and why they're asked to un-retire (I'm not aware of any Test player who has voluntarily taken on international cricket again without being asked). The larger cricketing nations, India, England and Australia should surely have enough quality players to choose from without the need to chase someone who's given a format away, for whatever reason. It's relatively common in England but exceedingly rare on both India and Oz, which speaks volumes about the quality of player coming out of each country - or the lak of trust selectors have in the new talent coming through.
Kamran
Roar Rookie
Exactly mate, completely agree with you. The concept retirement is that when you have announced it you won't play for the team again but un-retiring it doesn't really do justice to the team and its process. England supporters have to really question their team that do they have a good future? I mean they are still depending on Anderson and ofc Broad as well until he retired. England had to go back to a retired spinner moeen ali to take his retirement back because leach was injured and they didn't trust anyone in their domestic circle. Says you a lot about county cricket these days
Gilberto
Roar Rookie
If England's squad is better with Stokes then without then why not pick him. Brook Btw has only played 3 ODI in his career over a 1 week span.
Just Nuisance
Roar Rookie
Yes AB De Villiers request to return was denied ..Yes it was the right thing to refuse him .Yes his selection if approved would have improved the team ..That's the quonundrum here . How important is winning ? ...Its very important unfortunately..
BigGordon
Roar Rookie
If you think about the logic behind the decision to approach Stokes, as Jos Buttler admitted he did, it has to ring some serious alarm bells for England supporters. I gather Matthew Mott, the current England white ball coach, thought Stokes should be asked to play in the WC and Jos Buttler agreed. Presumably they must have put together a shortlist of the best 15 ODI players in England and decided they couldn't win it again without him. That doesn't say much for the depth of England white ball players if Stokes has to be offered a chance to un-retire. It can't have done the confidence of guys like Harry Brook much good. It also has to have some players questioning their places, at least till they're on the plane to India. I'd also suggest the timing is poor. There was lots of time between the Ashes finishing and the announcement of the England squad, for Stokes to tell everyone he'd throw his hat in the ring, but it seems the first people knew, was when it was leaked he could be a part of the squad which was only hours before it was announced.