Ali is overrated as a so called all rounder, often fails with the bat.
Would prefer they played someone else.
And with the ball he is only average - since Jan 2016 (so 3.5 years - an awful lot of games to judge someone's ability on) and 66 games:
Batting: 48 innings, 9 NO, 897 @23, with a SR of 106.02, 1 100 and 2 50s - I would argue that is below average for a number 8 these days - compare that to Woakes who bats below him in the order, and he had in 28 innings, with 10 NO, 612 runs @36 and 4 50s, I know which I think is the better bat; even compared to Rashid who bats 11 it is not that much better (312 runs @17, so only 6 runs higher)
Bowling: 483 overs, 2657 runs, 46 wickets @57.76, a SR of 63 and an economy of 5.5 - good economy, but appalling SR and average, in the side clearly for his bowling economy, rather than wicket taking abilities. Compared to Rashid, who has in the same time span bowled 554.5 overs, got 110 wickets @27.7, econ of 5.49 and SR of 30.2, it is not even close - even Rashid economy, which usually is criticised and the reason most given why Ali is in the team as well, is better!
Looking at those England bowlers to have bowled more than 200 overs since 2016, as a comparison, Stokes has the worst economy (6.1) with a SR of 50, so arguably is the person Ali bowls ahead of as the 5th/6th choice. Then you have Plunkett with econ of 5.89 and SR of 27.8 (so marginally worst econ - 4 runs per 10 overs, but massively better SR - more than double the wickets) Willey with econ of 5.82 and SR of 44 (so marginally worst econ - 3 runs per 10 overs, significantly better SR - more 33% more wickets); and then everyone else has basically identical economies with much better SRs. Beyond me why Ali keeps getting games in this format.
