Survive and Succeed
Ben Stokes survived, built, and thrived his way to 100 Tests
Ben Stokes plays his 100th Test match today; I wonder, at what point did he make this a career milestone? The answer is likely to be never. Not knowing him and taking liberties with subjective profiling, I assume that milestones mean little to him. He's more about disruption, transformation, and generational change. In his words, "Milestones are what they are" he looks more to the "theatre" that comes with playing this landmark game against a star-studded India. The legacy—an ascension that David Warner craved—that Stokes leaves will be attached, in the main, to the most confusing word in cricket: Bazball, which will be an unjust reflection, given the enormity of his career.
SpeakingNick is a reader-supported venture. Free and paid versions are available. The best way to support me is by taking out a paid subscription.
Stokes, 32, will be the 16th English player to reach the 100 Test milestone. He's right; it's just a number, much the same as 99 or 101. however, a sense of longevity should be acknowledged—even reluctantly on his part.
2013, Adelaide, his debut, seems an eternity ago. It started one of the most storied and successful careers in English cricketing history. Isolating Stokes Test numbers paints a different picture than the one drawn by his actions. 6251 at 36 with 13 centuries and 197 wickets at an average of 32—at his peak, Stokes would warrant a place as either a batter or a bowler, the accurate benchmark of an all-rounder's worth; however, his impact rating would be off the charts. Ask Justin Langer for confirmation!
These numbers bring Stokes closer to becoming only the third player to achieve the double of 6,000 runs and 200 wickets after two of the game's greats, Jacques Kallis and Sir Garfield Sobers.
The 'impact-scale' headlines his Ashes Test of 2019 at Headingley, where his unbeaten 135 carried England to one of their most incredible wins. He and Jack Leach will be forever on speed dial!
I mentioned David Warner earlier; he continues to infiltrate cricket columns! There is relevance, though. I've been thinking about players' career phases for a while now. Then, I relate this back to my own journey. Warner recently retired on his own terms; there was much back and forth on whether he could be afforded this option. Eventually, a hundred in Perth, against an underprepared Pakistan attack, guaranteed his want for a Sydney (SCG) departure. That's a Test career; mine was confined to 1980s and 1990s County cricket. I know, they're poles apart. Still, there's a comparison to make with both Stokes and Warner.
It was an unhealthy education, County cricket at that time. Age and experience stood over youthful exuberance. Pecking orders dominated the counties. Much like the current provision for 'negative gearing' in Australian home ownership, the 'benefit year' experience in this space inflated the average age, much the same as 'negative gearing', and has taken home ownership away from many young Australians. Don't get me wrong; personally, I wouldn't have swapped it for anything. Now, 20 odd years removed, I am genuinely thankful for the experiences I enjoyed.
The time thinking has whittled the journey down to four phases:
Firstly—Survive
Pretty self-explanatory. In Stokes and Warner's case, you're picked from first-class cricket (actually, not in Warner's case) on the back of form, promise, or a combination of both, so stepping up a level. In my case, from second XI to First-class cricket. And, you have a period to swim, not sink. Stokes wasted little time with a century in his second Test against an Australian attack spearheaded by Mitchell Johnson on a spicy pitch in Perth. For me, it took longer, two long, unproductive seasons.
Second—Build
So, let's say Warner survived the initiation, which he did; the platform is partly finished, and now to work on rounding out the foundations. You've bought time to think and start analysing your technique; there are holes to plug and restrictions to breach. I see this phase as the most critical to any player. When speaking to players, I use a 'mastering language' metaphor to describe the emotions that connect 'build' with the next phase.
It's time to—Thrive (or succeed)
This is the auto-pilot phase. Players are at the peak of their powers. One game rolls into the next; in the case of batting, one score stacks on the next. Concerns around match situations, bowling attacks, and pitches evaporate. Opposition retreats to a containing mode, no longer believing they can force a mistake, instead waiting for 'batter error'. A great place to be, which is continually under-valued. The metaphor I use here is a financial one: runs compound on themselves, like money grows from the compounding interest model. Like batting, compounding interest is not easily understood—that's a note to oneself.
Lastly, to be avoided—Protect
I don't see 'protection' in Ben Stokes. By protecting, I mean precisely that, players getting toward the end of a career and flat-out protecting what they have. In this twilight phase, granted, a player's skills are often waning; I'm not sure their instincts are affected, though. And, it's the instincts that are ignored first. I don't have the stats to hand, but David Warner's numbers clearly receded as his career closed. The metaphor used here is like the gambler who questions his cards because he's in front; they play with more caution, ignoring the processes that have them in the position they are in. Don't you think Ben Stokes would choose to break the house rather than just beat it?
I merely took home a few more chips than I came with, spending far too long in the 'protect' phase, equally in survive and not enough time in 'build' and 'thrive'.
Right now, Ben Stokes is a unique Test cricketer. His protection mechanism is negligible; it goes against everything I was told and saw. However, as the modern game becomes increasingly contemporary, we will see more players follow the Stokes model and less choose the conservative route the protectionists prefer. Either way, it makes for fascinating viewing.
Ps. I didn't receive a benefit at Lancashire or Durham, nor should I have.
Thanks Nick. Great to hear about your own time at first class level. Not to be underestimated. I hope to learn more.