Having fought incredibly hard to put his side in a position of command, Stokes, with victory in sight, miscued a Shardul Thakur off-cutter and ended up hitting it straight to the hands of the fielder at long-off. His efforts, eventually, meant nothing as his teammates surrendered to hand India the victory.

For all his exploits with the bat in both ODI and Test cricket, Stokes, as ridiculous as it sounds, is still a cricketer finding his feet in T20 cricket. After a decade of playing the format, he still - both in franchise and international cricket - does not know if he is an opener, an all-rounder, a middle-order batsman or a finisher. And his numbers reflect the same. In 138 T20 matches, he averages an unremarkable 26.07 at a SR of 136.62, while these numbers plummet further in T20I cricket - a pretty hideous average of 20.38 to go along with no fifty-plus scores. 

The second, and the more pertinent one, is that England simply have not utilized Stokes effectively in T20s, by deploying him down the order. Stokes’ natural ball-striking ability coupled with the fact that he is an all-rounder - not to forget England having a stacked top-order - has meant that the Three Lions have employed the southpaw as a finisher, but, as was evident from the 2nd T20I, where he ambled towards a 21-ball 24 when his side needed a late flourish, batting down the order is a role that simply does not suit Stokes. 52% of Stokes’s 27 innings in T20I cricket have come at No.6 or below and his numbers there are evidently shocking: he averages a mere 13.30 and has been dismissed under 20 a remarkable 58% of the times. 

But while some may - rightly - argue that the numbers prove that Stokes might not fit into England’s best T20 XI, and that the side might be better off with a natural finisher like Moeen Ali, this simply is not true. As he showed in the 4th T20I in Ahmedabad, there is a place for Stokes in the English side, and it is higher up the order. On Thursday, Stokes, arguably, played the best T20I innings of his career. Walking in to bat at 66/3, with his side under the pump, the southpaw bided his time, measured the situation and launched an onslaught that was agonizingly close to taking the game away from the Indians. It was the only instance of Stokes registering a 200+ SR in a T20I innings where he’d faced more than 20 balls. 

Unfortunately for both Stokes and England, though, time at the crease is a luxury that the southpaw has not been afforded in his T20I career. Incredibly, to date, the all-rounder has faced an average of just 11.51 balls per innings in his international T20 career. That this is largely down to him donning the finisher role is understandable, but for a batsman of Stokes’ calibre, this is a figure that’s criminally low.

With a minor - or major; however you’d like to see it - tweak, however, England can fix the situation and get the best out of Stokes the batsman. Taking a cue from his IPL career, and also his best T20I knocks for the country, England could turn Stokes into an indomitable force with the bat in T20 internationals by promoting him up the order.

But a breakdown of his batting position in the IPL clearly indicates that the higher Stokes has batted, the more effective he has been. His average and runs scored at #4 and #5 are identical but there is a marked difference in the strike rate, indicating that he’s had his fair share of troubles trying to up the ante from the get-go.

So, how do England fit in Stokes up the order, then? It will be incredibly harsh, but the Three Lions will have no option but to axe Dawid Malan to accommodate Stokes at No.3. The move, apart from helping the team get the best out of Stokes, will also add a better balance to the side (more on this in a while). 

Dissecting Malan’s flattering T20I numbers will need a different, detailed piece altogether - or you could just check out this video from the ever-so-cool Jarrod Kimber - but the bottom line is both him and Stokes are inherently similarly-wired T20 batsmen - they like to bide their time before wreaking havoc. Where Stokes edges Malan, however, is his flexibility to accelerate in the powerplay if and when the situation demands. 

Contrastingly, Malan’s approach inside the first six overs have not just been a major concern, but have immeasurably hurt the side. Since the start of 2018, in 57 non-international T20 games, Malan has struck at a snail-like 109.1 inside the powerplay, while in the ongoing T20Is versus India, this number has dropped to an unacceptable 84.4. In the 4th T20I, in particular, England, chasing 186, needed Malan to accelerate after Buttler and Roy had amassed just 15 in the first 17 deliveries, but the southpaw, instead, scored just 5 off the 8 powerplay deliveries he faced. It is one thing to religiously stick to one approach, but the hallmark of great batsmen is to adapt; thus far in his short international career, Malan, particularly on slow wickets, has displayed a glaring inability to play according to the situation. 

Now the question can be raised - why should Stokes replace Malan of all people, when there is clearly no need for the same. One, Stokes simply has a higher ceiling. Malan might have had a remarkable start to his T20I career, but his overall T20 numbers - an average of 33 and SR of 128 across 227 matches - suggest that a dip in form is inevitable, and he is, all in all, an anchor who straddles between ‘good’ and ‘average’. Two, and most importantly, pushing Stokes to No.3 will free up a spot in the middle-order for England to accommodate a right-hander, and this would be vitally important for the side. 

While Livingstone - a flexible batsman who can bat anywhere from 1 to 6 -  will also provide the side with an extra spinning option - he bowls both off and leg spin - Billings, on the other hand, is a seasoned customer who also has prior experience batting in India in the middle order. In 7 innings at #5 in the IPL, Billings has struck 169 runs at quite a remarkable SR of 150.9. 

Moeen Ali, in the eyes of many, is the ideal candidate to barge into the side in the scenario of Malan getting dropped, but the off-spinner’s underwhelming record - and unreliability -  with the bat means that he will not be competing for a spot in the Top 6. He will, instead, be vying to take the spot of Sam Curran, whose bits-and-pieces batting and bowling have not rendered too useful for England in T20 international cricket thus far.