England captain Ben Stokes has defended the decision to hand rookie batter Jacob Bethell a Test debut in the pivotal number three slot against New Zealand, telling fans: “we do know what we’re doing”.
A selection reshuffle enforced by Jordan Cox’s broken thumb means Ollie Pope will take the wicketkeeping gloves for the first Test in Christchurch, which starts on Wednesday night at 10pm GMT, as well as dropping drown to six in the batting order.
And, rather than nudge the vastly experienced Joe Root up a place on his 150th appearance, or promote himself, Stokes has gambled by handing the job to an untried 21-year-old.
Bethell has never batted at three in a brief first-class career comprising only 20 matches, averages only 25.44 and is yet to score a professional century.
But he is considered one of the brightest talents of his generation and has already showed enough star quality in his early forays as a white-ball international to earn a £250,000 pay cheque from IPL franchise Royal Challengers Bangalore this week.
The decision will nevertheless cause plenty of attention given his modest red-ball achievements but Stokes and head coach Brendon McCullum have made a habit of backing youthful promise rather than proven performers in their time together. Rehan Ahmed, Shoaib Bashir, Jamie Smith, Tom Hartley and Josh Hull have all been fast-tracked into the Test side and it is a method Stokes makes no apologies for.
“We’re not picking people just to wind people up. There is thought and there is process towards it, even if it does raise a few eyebrows,” he said after the news sparked surprised reactions among supporters on social media.
“People might not quite understand it, but that’s how me and Baz have operated for a long period of time now. I’ve not changed for anybody else’s opinion or criticism. It’s gone in our favour quite a lot, so I think we do know what we’re doing.
“We’ve got a pretty good understanding, insight and a good eye for picking players to fulfil a role. We were faced this week with another problem but we found the solution and we’re completely comfortable with that. You’ve got to be true to yourself when you get given the opportunity to make decisions.”
Stokes was in reflective mood when it came to his own role as leader of the side, offering a harsh critique of his efforts in last month’s 2-1 series loss in Pakistan.
He arrived on that tour still recovering from a badly torn hamstring, was not ready for the first game and later chastised himself for acting like a “grumpy old man” towards his team-mates after chances went down during the second Test.
It later emerged that his family home had been burgled by a masked gang while his wife and children were inside during the same game. That would be enough to excuse any temporary lapses on the field but Stokes believes he was guilty of getting too caught up in his own fitness battle at the expense of his duties to the team.
“I cleared the air pretty early on with the lads (in New Zealand), when they got into Queenstown early on,” he said.
“Pakistan was one of my hardest trips but also one that I’ve hugely benefited from. I’ve been pretty honest with myself and pretty honest with Baz and the team as well that I got so individually focused on myself over a long period of time trying to get back from injury, that I actually I did physically drain and ruin myself.
“It’s made me realise that being a captain, being the leader of this team, I can’t take myself into that sort of area ever again. There’s no doubt that my frustration was showing when things weren’t quite going our way and that definitely has an impact on the players around me.
“Everyone is sort of standing on eggshells around you, because they can sense it. It’s another step forward for me as a leader and an understanding of certain things where I need to be better.”
Stokes revealed he had briefly considered leaving Pakistan during the second Test following the break-in but was over-ruled.
“I did actually think about but it was my wife who told me not to,” he said.
“She was adamant, that I needed to stay out there.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here