Forum search & shortcuts

Ben Stokes
 

[Closed] Ben Stokes

Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I would like to see him unable to play for England until community service or suspended sentence is over/expired.

Why would you like that?


 
Posted : 13/08/2018 8:22 pm
Posts: 52609
Free Member
 

I suspect he is guilty and he will get the usual celeb treatment of big fine, comminity service and a suspended sentence.

Given how high profile this is I'd expect it to go by the book. Which these days is probably not custodial anyway.


 
Posted : 13/08/2018 8:26 pm
Posts: 384
Free Member
 

I wouldn’t mess with him!

I agree the press coverage has been poor. I reckon his defence has done very well for him and he’ll be back wrecking batsman’s dreams shortly.


 
Posted : 13/08/2018 9:20 pm
Posts: 21016
Full Member
 

£695 for a pair of trainers?!?!

Send him daaaaahn........


 
Posted : 13/08/2018 9:36 pm
Posts: 0
Full Member
 

I think he'll probably get off.

At least the last test has shown we don't need to him to win - a little bit of cloud and Trent Bridge should swing nicely so I doubt we'll need to bat twice.


 
Posted : 13/08/2018 9:45 pm
Posts: 0
Full Member
 

Incidentally, literally a month before the offence Stokes is being charged for, there was a episode of Fighting Talk when one of the panelists recalled a story about Stokes in the 2014 (?) Ashes series... He came out to bat and the Aussie wicket keeper starter to sledge him.  The English batsman at the other end (forget who) took Haddin to one side and told him to lay off.  When Haddin ask why he was told 'because he'll f$%&*g kill you'.


 
Posted : 13/08/2018 9:52 pm
Posts: 52609
Free Member
 

He came out to bat and the Aussie wicket keeper starter to sledge him.  The English batsman at the other end (forget who) took Haddin to one side and told him to lay off.  When Haddin ask why he was told ‘because he’ll f$%&*g kill you’.

Sounds like a tame one there considering what the Aussies liked to fling about


 
Posted : 13/08/2018 9:53 pm
Posts: 44850
Full Member
 

Stokes is well known for his temper - broke his hand punching a door after being out in one match and  put himself out for a while.

I think his brief has muddied the water enough to get him off.

IIRC the ECB did not drop him from the ashes because of this but because his head was not in the right place.  so he is still awaiting any punishment from the ECB.

Unfortunately over the last decade or so the England cricket team has been full of rather nasty characters.  cliques who bullied others


 
Posted : 13/08/2018 10:55 pm
Posts: 52609
Free Member
 

I think his brief has muddied the water enough to get him off.

IIRC the ECB did not drop him from the ashes because of this but because his head was not in the right place.  so he is still awaiting any punishment from the ECB.

Opinions again?

Lets wait until the trial concludes before you disagree with the verdict 😉


 
Posted : 13/08/2018 11:00 pm
Posts: 7087
Full Member
 

I heard that fighting talk episode - it was Eleanor Oldroyd.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 12:17 am
Posts: 52609
Free Member
 

TBH if you have followed anything of the last few years of Aussie cricket then anything said in the middle would be taken as part of what was going on

A claim later emerged on Monday night that de Kock’s personal slur directed at Warner was in response to Warner first crossing the line with a series of personal attacks directed at the South African keeper as he was trying to save the game with his bat in the second innings…

The Proteas are privately alleging that Warner referenced de Kock’s sister and mother in some verbals.

Separate reports claim the South African camp also briefed local media that Warner called de Kock a “bush pig”.

A further report from South Africa’s Independent Media — the first news site to publish the leaked CCTV footage from Durban — claims Warner “led an hour long attack on the field” as de Kock and opener Aiden Markram frustrated the Aussie attack on their way to eventually winning the series opener on day five.

Read more:  http://www.2oceansvibe.com/2018/03/06/heres-what-david-warner-said-to-quinton-de-kock-before-that-incident/#ixzz5O6FIBWGI

The quote above sounds fair game for the levels of in your face abuse that was going on, it seems like a good thing to say to quieten down some gobby shites who used to wear the baggy green. It would be a bold/stupid person to bring up sledging in that series as a character statement.

I'm certainly not defending his actions but firstly lets wait until the verdict, most of the case appears to rest on opinions and who you believe.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 12:28 am
Posts: 24893
Free Member
 

From what I've read - altercation happens over whether or not some people who haven't been identified or called by either side were abused / threatened by one or both sides.

One guy turns a beer bottle the other way up (presumably to act as a weapon) while the other allegedly graps a piece of metal from a road sign.

Stokes reacts and punches both - self defence or anger? Possibly both. How much do you punch someone in that situation? Until they aren't a threat any longer doesn't seem unreasonable, once you're past the point of trying avoid the need to punch anyone. (As someone who doesn't / hasn't been in this sort of situation, to hit someone once and then wait to see if that has put them off, or just made them more likely to attack you seems daft)

What I don't get is that Alex Hales (who hasn't been charged with anything) then apparently kicks (at least one of) the guys when they're down - seen on a video?

Clearly no doubt Stokes did it, just comes down to whether he really thought he was about to be bottled / the other guy about to attack him with a road sign, whether that was proportionate as a response, etc.

Is this being prosecuted because of the offence or because of who is involved?

Why is there no case against Hales..... are they after Stokes alone perhaps because of reputation (and has that in the end helped his case because they don't know what injuries Stokes caused and which Hales did?)


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 8:30 am
Posts: 8427
Free Member
 

Why wasn’t it decreed that drummers are meant to be role models, then the press could have tutted at Keith Moon’s antics.

They did ‘tut’ at his antics. Odd choice btw - Moon has been dead for forty years.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 11:45 am
Posts: 962
Full Member
 

Not guilty!? 🤔

I know nothing about the legalities of the charge, but I'd sign that legal team up!


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 1:49 pm
Posts: 52609
Free Member
 

and Not Guilty - awaits posts about celebrity getting you off etc

So given a jury has cleared him what sanction should the ECB take here?


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 1:49 pm
Posts: 7087
Full Member
 

Not guilty: certainly backs up the pummeling he was giving out in that fake video.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 1:50 pm
Posts: 11402
Free Member
 

lucky boy


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 1:52 pm
Posts: 23388
Full Member
Topic starter
 

Wow!


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 1:52 pm
Posts: 0
Full Member
 

Wow, I was way off. 🤷‍♂️

Then again the only overview I had was what was reported on R5L.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 1:53 pm
Posts: 52609
Free Member
 

Not guilty: certainly backs up the pummeling he was giving out in that fake video.

The charge was affray, that is what he is judged against not punching somebody.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 1:55 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I had to look up the definition of affray, and having done so the verdict seems fair enough to me.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 2:02 pm
Posts: 16222
Free Member
 

and Not Guilty – awaits posts about celebrity getting you off etc

Dunno about celebrity but money helps a great deal.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 2:05 pm
Posts: 52609
Free Member
 

The other bloke got off too


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 2:07 pm
Posts: 23388
Full Member
Topic starter
 

They couldn't really convict one and not the other, unless he knocked himself out.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 2:13 pm
Posts: 6160
Full Member
 

And apparently they shook hands in the dock after the verdict, which gives it a slight sense of "two blokes and some argy bargy after a few (lot of) beers". Not to condone it, but fights happen every Friday and Saturday night outside bars - few of them result in a high-profile court case


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 2:35 pm
 TomB
Posts: 1659
Full Member
 

Interesting that the prosecution asked for the lesser charge of assault occasioning ABH before trial, but were denied by the judge. I reckon that might have stuck.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 3:14 pm
Posts: 2746
Free Member
 

And apparently they shook hands in the dock after the verdict, which gives it a slight sense of “two blokes and some argy bargy after a few (lot of) beers”. Not to condone it, but fights happen every Friday and Saturday night outside bars – few of them result in a high-profile court case

I rest my case m'lud

Now, what real news has happened whilst this farce has been playing out  😉


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 3:17 pm
Posts: 8777
Full Member
 

Interesting as well that they mentioned they were charged with affray as no one made a complaint so they couldn't be charged with assault.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 3:19 pm
Posts: 20908
Free Member
 

I can't believe there was such a fuss over it really - as has been said it was a typical weekend beered-up fight between adults, none of which were particularly innocent parties.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 3:21 pm
Posts: 24893
Free Member
 

as I said above - if it wasn't for the person involved they'd have both been given a stern telling off and told to go home.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 3:40 pm
Posts: 8
Free Member
 

The gay couple that were in the middle of things there have apparently stated that Ben Stokes was protecting them.

https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2018/08/14/gay-couple-ben-stokes-homophobic-abuse/


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 8:15 pm
 Drac
Posts: 50647
 

Was that not what Stokes claimed along he was defending 2 other blokes from a homophobic attack?


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 8:22 pm
Posts: 28593
Free Member
 

The prosecution scrabbling around to move the goalposts at the courtroom door is a clear indicator of charging decisions made for reasons other than the evidence.

Assault/ABH would have been the correct charge, with Stokes in court quickly rather than a year later. Even then a self defence argument could be made given the other guys had weapons of sorts.

EDIT: Didn't realise no-one had even complained of assault!


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 8:29 pm
Posts: 52609
Free Member
 

The article above certainly paints a very different picture to the one told in court. I wonder why they were not called as witnesses?

Though pink news should really check how their links read


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 9:16 pm
 DanW
Posts: 1062
Free Member
 

Lets not forget around the same time Duckett poured a drink to effectively end his England career whereas Stokes (and others with similarly poor alcohol related behaviour) are somewhat better at cricket and have hefty contracts so get a free pass... wouldn't surprise me at all if the ECB continue to give a slap on the wrists and no lasting consequences


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 9:29 pm
 Drac
Posts: 50647
 

So you're saying now that the court has found them innocent that the ECB should hand out another punishment?


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 9:34 pm
Posts: 52609
Free Member
 

Or maybe Duckett blew his first chance and has not proved himself again yet.

The article above tells a very different story to the court case reporting, which should we believe?


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 9:35 pm
 DanW
Posts: 1062
Free Member
 

It depends how being videoed on CCTV kicking and punching someone sits with codes of conduct his employer sets. I'm not sure I could have a night out with work colleagues like that and have no consequences.

To quote someone else in earlier threads, Paddy Jackson was sacked on being cleared of rape. Clarkson was sacked despite charges not being brought for his punch. Lee Bowyer was fined despite being cleared of affray, etc, etc.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 9:40 pm
Posts: 7279
Free Member
 

The article above tells a very different story to the court case reporting, which should we believe?

it is completely consistent with the defence case, you obviously only read the reporting of the prosecution case.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 10:21 pm
Posts: 52609
Free Member
 

it is completely consistent with the defence case, you obviously only read the reporting of the prosecution case.

The Majority of the headlines skipped most of that, the last BBC headline lead with the prosecution allegation as if it was fact.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 10:24 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I bet the ‘handshake’ in the dock was one of those faux red indian warrior-brother hand clasps as well (where is the ‘rolls eyes’ emoji when you need it).

Whatever the outcome legally, they’ve all come out of this looking like right tosspots.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 10:33 pm
 Drac
Posts: 50647
 

Clarkson was sacked despite charges not being brought for his punch.

He resigned.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 10:33 pm
Posts: 7279
Free Member
 

Highly unlikely - there are very strict rules on court reporting, you need to observe the quotation marks and be a more critical reader.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 10:33 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I'm a big cricket fan and Ben Stokes is am absolutely brilliant batsman, bowler and fielder.

But that's irrelevant.

I don't understand how he isn't guilty of assault. Video clearly shows him punching someone and knocking them to the floor.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 11:27 pm
Posts: 52609
Free Member
 

I don’t understand how he isn’t guilty of assault. Video clearly shows him punching someone and knocking them to the floor.

He was not charged with assault as there was no complaint. That is how he was not found guilty of it.

The situation was assessed with all the available information not just the video, the video was only part of what was considered in the trial. To form a judgement based on incomplete evidence would be short sighted.

There is a link on the previous page that says he stepped in to stop something happening to other people too, that sits as part of the judgement.


 
Posted : 14/08/2018 11:32 pm
Page 2 / 3