30th ODI ton for Virat Kohli - Equals Ricky Ponting

[ahmedwaqas92]

If we remove his not outs from Knock out games his RPI (Runs per Innings) drops to 24.64 from 31.36

If we remove his not outs from Finals his RPI (Runs per Innings) drops to 19.25 from 22.00

He has no centuries in tournament finals + the same size in 14 games out of which he has only 2 half centuries.

 

[Leo23]

If we remove his not outs from Knock out games his RPI (Runs per Innings) drops to 24.64 from 31.36

If we remove his not outs from Finals his RPI (Runs per Innings) drops to 19.25 from 22.00

He has no centuries in tournament finals + the same size in 14 games out of which he has only 2 half centuries.

yes azhar ali and fakhar are better than him because they performed in the final and kohli failed

his 30 hundreds are worthless and he wishes he was as good as them

 

[kingusama92]

If we remove his not outs from Knock out games his RPI (Runs per Innings) drops to 24.64 from 31.36

If we remove his not outs from Finals his RPI (Runs per Innings) drops to 19.25 from 22.00

He has no centuries in tournament finals + the same size in 14 games out of which he has only 2 half centuries.

Your original point holds merit and is a legitimate kink in his armor. This post however is unnecessary as it can be done with any player.

If we remove Viv Richard's not outs in semi finals, he averages 16.

If we remove Viv Richard's only hundred in a final, he averages 19.66.

Yet, Viv is seen as GOAT.

All it takes is one innings. And given Kohli's performances and ability to handle pressure in big T20I knockout games, it's a matter of time in my opinion.

 

[Chrish]

Yeah I don't see how anyone can label Kohli as a certified choker. It would be someone like Amla who has no hope of performing when the chips are down.

So it's only a matter of time..

 

[Chrish]

And KO knocks should be taken with pinch of salt. Gilly scored hundred in that final but he was flop during entire tournament otherwise. Same thing happen with Dhoni iirc.

So player's overall performance throughout the tournament and how he helps the team reach in KO games should be the criteria to judge the success/ failure; not just selected couple of games.

 

[ahmedwaqas92]

Your original point holds merit and is a legitimate kink in his armor. This post however is unnecessary as it can be done with any player.

If we remove Viv Richard's not outs in semi finals, he averages 16.

If we remove Viv Richard's only hundred in a final, he averages 19.66.

Yet, Viv is seen as GOAT.

All it takes is one innings. And given Kohli's performances and ability to handle pressure in big T20I knockout games, it's a matter of time in my opinion.

But the difference between True greats and Kohli at the moment is that one gun innings where he stands up and plays that ATG level knock which Ponting, Gilchrist, Hayden, Viv etc etc all have played in their careeers to make the elite club of players that they are apart of. The moment Kohli hits that I will be the first one to stand up and Acknowledge him for his greatness.

My metric for RPI was to normalize the data and nothing else, you can place that metric to any other player and it will have the same effect and by no means had I mentioned it in a sense to demean any player. The reason why we do RPI is to remove the uncertainity caused by Not Out Inflation and to linearize a progression. If RPI makes Viv's average go to 19.66 then so be it but Viv at the same time has a GOAT century and 11 50s in knock out games so let's look at Viv's numbers in comparisons.

Konck Out Games Viv Richards (Finas + Semi Finals + Tournament Cons Finals)



He averages 53.42 and if we take his RPI then it only drops to 46.13

If I just take his numbers for Finals:



Run Per Innings is 49.17 dropping from 55.xx

This is why Viv is the GOAT

Note: I know I troll quite a fair bit these days but facts are facts bro.....And this has nothing to do with Kohli being an India !!

 

[ahmedwaqas92]

yes azhar ali and fakhar are better than him because they performed in the final and kohli failed

his 30 hundreds are worthless and he wishes he was as good as them

I never claimed anything that you've mentioned in your post bro. I was just sharing a statistic that I thought should be something that has to be taken into account when considering longeivity and the true impact of a player.

Being Clutch is something I believe is of paramount significance for an Athlete (no matter what the sport is). If you're not clutch you're not good enough, at least for me.

 

[jnaveen1980]

But the difference between True greats and Kohli at the moment is that one gun innings where he stands up and plays that ATG level knock which Ponting, Gilchrist, Hayden, Viv etc etc all have played in their careeers to make the elite club of players that they are apart of. The moment Kohli hits that I will be the first one to stand up and Acknowledge him for his greatness.

My metric for RPI was to normalize the data and nothing else, you can place that metric to any other player and it will have the same effect and by no means had I mentioned it in a sense to demean any player. The reason why we do RPI is to remove the uncertainity caused by Not Out Inflation and to linearize a progression. If RPI makes Viv's average go to 19.66 then so be it but Viv at the same time has a GOAT century and 11 50s in knock out games so let's look at Viv's numbers in comparisons.

Konck Out Games Viv Richards (Finas + Semi Finals + Tournament Cons Finals)

View attachment 76040

He averages 53.42 and if we take his RPI then it only drops to 46.13

If I just take his numbers for Finals:

View attachment 76041

Run Per Innings is 49.17 dropping from 55.xx

This is why Viv is the GOAT

Note: I know I troll quite a fair bit these days but facts are facts bro.....And this has nothing to do with Kohli being an India !!

Why couldn't GOAT help West Indies get to final in 1983 and 1987? he bottled chasing a meagre total of 183 runs in 60 overs. GOAT had array of pace bowlers, gun support batsmen and a ruthless captain. Oppositions generally had one good bowler. That's about it.

 

[ahmedwaqas92]

Why couldn't GOAT help West Indies get to final in 1983 and 1987? he bottled chasing a meagre total of 183 runs in 60 overs. GOAT had array of pace bowlers, gun support batsmen and a ruthless captain. Oppositions generally had one good bowler. That's about it.

I respect your opinion but the numbers say otherwise, which are clearly showing showing as Viv to be the superior clutch batsmen among the two players in question. Let's just say we can agree to disagree on the matter.

 

[Leo23]

I never claimed anything that you've mentioned in your post bro. I was just sharing a statistic that I thought should be something that has to be taken into account when considering longeivity and the true impact of a player.

Being Clutch is something I believe is of paramount significance for an Athlete (no matter what the sport is). If you're not clutch you're not good enough, at least for me.

kohli IS clutch. few failures is not the end of the world.

he will win a world cup for india or will perform extremely well. his performances in wt20s shows his ability to handle pressure

yes it is a different format but pressure is pressure especially of icc tourneys

he also played superbly in the 2013 ct final

 

[ahmedwaqas92]

kohli IS clutch. few failures is not the end of the world.

he will win a world cup for india or will perform extremely well. his performances in wt20s shows his ability to handle pressure

yes it is a different format but pressure is pressure especially of icc tourneys

he also played superbly in the 2013 ct final

When he wins India a World Cup then you can come and point out this facet while until then he's not what his fans claim him to be. I know he's the idol of many kids these days but there are people on this planet as well who have seen cricket for decades and can make a simple comparison based on their experiences and what the score sheet says objectively.

A few failures indeed but those games were the games that really mattered the most. Scoring 8 centuries against SL proves nothing and that too in an LOI As far as what the numbers say he is a choker when it comes to the biggest stage and there are no two ways about it.

 

[Leo23]

When he wins India a World Cup then you can come and point out this facet while until then he's not what his fans claim him to be. I know he's the idol of many kids these days but there are people on this planet as well who have seen cricket for decades and can make a simple comparison based on their experiences and what the score sheet says objectively.

A few failures indeed but those games were the games that really mattered the most. Scoring 8 centuries against SL proves nothing and that too in an LOI As far as what the numbers say he is a choker when it comes to the biggest stage and there are no two ways about it.

lol at choker. shows your ignorance. )

unfortunately the importance of games is not to your convenience

for example the wt20 semifinal and final in 2014 and the wt20 qf vs australia in 2016 and the ct 2013 final were not less important in the matches that he has failed

kohli continues to achieve what people like you consider impossible for him. before the australian tour in 2014 people said that he can only score in asia and will struggle on the fast bouncy aussie pitches against a rampant johnson

and what happened?

he made johnson cry like a little girl and had a record breaking series but the same haters started downplaying his performance because the pitches were flat

now the same folks are saying that he will fail in england next year but when he will score they will again cry flat pitches

similarly when he performs in a world cup final or semi final people will again cry flat pitches. i can bet my bottom dollar that he scored in the ct final you would have been the first to dismiss his innings because the wicket was flat and even pakistan scored 330+

it seems kohli can't win and when you have so many haters it proves you greatness

keep hating and keep being bitter while he will march on and on and break records. already an odi atg and second to viv richards only.

 

[maxamax]

lol what?

comparing younis and misbah to kohli in odis is like comparing zaheer khan to wasim akram

90% of saeed anwar's odi runs have come on flat asian wickets and against weak indian,sri lankan bowlers

in australia,south africa,new zealand on bouncy and swinging tracks he was a tailender

the guy is not fit to tie kohli's shoe laces. he is a nobody compared to him

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/42605.html?class=2;template=results;type=batting

He has scored fairly against all of them, keeping in mind that it wasnt easy to score in Australia those days like it is now.

I am not sure about Saeed Anwar being better than Kohli, but I am never convince that Kohli is classy like Tendulkar or even Dravid in tough conditions. I am comparing him to Younis Khan because both batsmen have made bulk of their career runs on flat tracks/dead bowlers.

 

[maxamax]

What kind of logic is that?

Kohli will play on wickets that is served to him and others. He will face the bowlers that are in front of him.
What exactly is "soft wickets"?

Thing is many fans dont like Kohli because of his 2-3 failures in ICC events. Fair criticism, but to belittle his achievements makes no sense. If what Kohli achieved is 'soft and useless' then why has other batsmen in this era failed to match that.

Yes, its not his fault that he's not exposed, thanks to powerful BCCI at his time. Otherwise a couple of series against Pakistan would have exposed him huge, we all know what Amir and JK did to him.


Because no one else cares about padding stats. We can always bring in Hafeez on flat tracks to have such figures but its never the aim of any good team.

Kohli scores 90-95% of the times and PP logic is that everytime he scores the pitches are flat or opposition is weak. its only the times he fails , the pitches are difficult , all bowlers turn ATGs and off course ist a very important match automatically !!

okay, tell me 10 of his innings where he scored big against inform bowlers/tough conditions. I can put 10 of Mohammad Yousuf.

 

[kingusama92]

But the difference between True greats and Kohli at the moment is that one gun innings where he stands up and plays that ATG level knock which Ponting, Gilchrist, Hayden, Viv etc etc all have played in their careeers to make the elite club of players that they are apart of. The moment Kohli hits that I will be the first one to stand up and Acknowledge him for his greatness.

My metric for RPI was to normalize the data and nothing else, you can place that metric to any other player and it will have the same effect and by no means had I mentioned it in a sense to demean any player. The reason why we do RPI is to remove the uncertainity caused by Not Out Inflation and to linearize a progression. If RPI makes Viv's average go to 19.66 then so be it but Viv at the same time has a GOAT century and 11 50s in knock out games so let's look at Viv's numbers in comparisons.

Konck Out Games Viv Richards (Finas + Semi Finals + Tournament Cons Finals)

View attachment 76040

He averages 53.42 and if we take his RPI then it only drops to 46.13

If I just take his numbers for Finals:

View attachment 76041

Run Per Innings is 49.17 dropping from 55.xx

This is why Viv is the GOAT

Note: I know I troll quite a fair bit these days but facts are facts bro.....And this has nothing to do with Kohli being an India !!

You've made an error.

It doesn't make sense to start accounting for performances in those "best of three" finals that Viv played in since he got three shots per tournament. That's not a "knockout" scenario.

I think that's a harsh requirement for an ATG.

If so, Grant Elliot is a greater ODI batsman than Kohli because he performed against SA (WC 2015). The collective resume holds importance while determining a player's stature as an ATG. Kohli has most definitely solidified he's an ATG if he retired right now.

Yes, the subject of GOAT can include a stipulation of being clutch. This is why only Viv is a valid contender in this race to the top.

 

[Proactive_]

The players care for these things as prize $$ and fame are involved which translates into more competitive series. This is the whole point of building a context to the Bi-lateral series.



If you are telling me that SL would have magically played a completely different brand of cricket in such a tri-series then you are flat out wrong.

To answer your question .... do you remember who won the Khaleej Times Tri-Series and the teams involved ? I certainly don't. And granted I wont remember many of the Bi-laterals unless something spectacular happens ( Like a Kohli 100 in 50 balls or a 5-0 whitewash or India chasing down 350 or Rohit making 250+ etc etc ) but speaking purely from a fans perspective it is not much different to the tri-series.

yes there used to be a time when any ODI cricket was a novelty and other entertainment options were limited therefore these series were dime-a-dozen but nobody has time for them anymore. Time to move on.

Tri Series would still be much more compelling since there would be an added dynamic of Aus-SL as well. Remember the 2011-12 Tri Series in Aus? One of the best ODI series of this decade simply because of the fact that every game along with the margins of victory/defeat mattered right until the last moment. Australia were getting the better of India, India were getting the better of SL and SL were getting the better of Aus. That's compelling cricket. Teams were forced to play the best cricket they could to keep their NRR healthy, that's something you just don't see in bilaterals, there is a completely different skill to multi team series than to bilaterals, there is simply no comparison.

 

[Proactive_]

So you must rate Madan Lal, Brett Leen, Mitchel Johnson and many others as better fast bowlers than Waqar Younis ?

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...e=100;template=results;trophy=12;type=bowling

No, because Waqar performed much better in many more ODIs with actual context in the 90s including various multi team tournaments. If Waqar only performed in bilaterals and went missing every time the stakes rose, I'd be calling out his record too, but as I said.. ODI cricket had much more context back in the 90s than it does now.

 

[squarecut]

Madan Lal and Mohinder Amarnath won India world cup final against the strongest West Indian team of all time by their bowling. This is a feat Imran Khan, Wasim Akram, Waqar Yunus never achieved. And this fact cannot be denied.

 

[Cricfan4eva]

The World Cup argument is mostly used by haters to downplay Kohli. It's obvious, doesn't even need a rebuttal. Sure performing in WC sets apart a player from the rest but a) not everyone gets an opportunity to have sizeable record in finals and b) 2-3 games don't define your whole career no matter how high the stakes are.

If that was so - So many ATGs wouldn't be rated highly. Kohli is the best chaser the game of cricket has ever seen. No one can deny that. He's beaten SRT's century record while chasing, raced to no.2 in most centuries list in just 8 years of international career. So it's but obvious his haters can't digest that.

Kohli is on his way to become the best ODI batsman in history of the game. The way he is notching up centuries 49 doesn't seem to far away. But even for Tendulkar 60 would have been on, if he didn't have to deal with tennis elbow and run of poor form due to injury. Hopefully Kohli wont have anything like that, not with his fitness regime.

 

[Spidy201]

I think kohli must apologize for making his 30th odi hundred. how dare he could do that. making all centuries against minnows like SL and WI on flat tracks, no other Batsman has ever played against these minnows attacks on flattest pitches, that's completely unfair.
and those people who are hyping him, like he is some sort of decent player need a break.
if you remove his innings where he made his runs in singles, doubles, fours and sixes he actually averages 0. a big fat zero. such a player wouldn't find place in any decent batting lineup like Pak, Eng, SA. because these sides have lots of clutch players and won so many world cup and lost count on them.

 

[Aman]

I for one cannot wait till Kohli performs in an ICC KO game just to see you eat crow.

We all know it's going to happen, just some posters here are too bitter to admit it.

He's too good and too driven not to correct it.

 

[Spidy201]

I for one cannot wait till Kohli performs in an ICC KO game just to see you eat crow.

We all know it's going to happen, just some posters here are too bitter to admit it.

He's too good and too driven not to correct it.

OK done. All his critics will eat crows if he scores a match winning inning in WC knock out match. But there are two rules for that.
Rule 1. It must not be a flat pitch
Rule 2. Any pitch where kohli plays well should be considered as flat pitch.

 

[ahmedwaqas92]

What's absolutely hilarious is that People are getting absolutely triggered because some folks hold an opinion and the worst part is it's based on FACTS !! )

 

[Spidy201]

What's absolutely hilarious is that People are getting absolutely triggered because some folks hold an opinion and the worst part is it's based on FACTS !! )

) absolutely. And this is unbiased criticism which kohli fans need to understand. Because we people here don't even consider Worthless bowlers like Waqar Younis, imran Khan and saqlain mushtaq any good aswell, because there performance in WC knockout matches is quite poor like kohli.
Here's their WC final, semis and quarterfinals record:

Waqar: 1 match 2 wkts at 33.5 & Eco: 6.7
Imran: 5 matches 5 wkts at 36.2 & Eco: 5.1
Saqlain: 2 matches 1 wkt at 57

^^these are "FACTS" of some poor bowlers which are considered greats by there fans lol )
I would rather have azar Ali in place of kohli and munaf Patel for Imran and Waqar in WC knockouts

 

[JibranAnsari]

Tendulkar who.

Kohli is the greatest odi batsman of all time.

 

[ToeCrusher2]

Tendulkar who.

Kohli is the greatest odi batsman of all time.

Not yet, Tendulkar is still the GREATEST, but kohli can get there

 

[Haz95]

What's absolutely hilarious is that People are getting absolutely triggered because some folks hold an opinion and the worst part is it's based on FACTS !! )

lmao especially some supposed 'Pakistani' Kohli fans, yes you... [MENTION=145243]Leo23[/MENTION].

Everytime I make a point in this thread he just cries, then cries a bit more then ultimately ignores what I say because he can't accept that Kohli is prone to criticsm. The guy is meant to be the 2nd greatest ODI batsman ever yet doesn't have a single knock in a pressure knockout game. Asia Cups, T20 cups and the like don't count. All he has is a 40 odd in a CT final, which is the one respectable thing but it's the knock is relatively insignificant since it was a 20 over, score setting (not a chasing) game. He's in the peak of his prime, he was this CT final considering the games leading up to it but we saw what happened. . .

All I keep hearing is that 'he's too good not to' score. I believe it why lie....until Kohli fools us all, myself included whenever he's out of his comfort zone.

 

[Haz95]

Basically Kohlis career so far:
1)Kohli does insane superhuman feats, GOAT, King Kohli and the usual. Kohli 'haters' call him out saying in order to be that he needs to do it when it counts

2) Important ICC game comes, Kohli for some reason fails to turn up. Kohli 'haters' have a field day while his little followers disappear

3) Kohli once again does insane superhuman feats, murders the oppostion in style in bilateral. Kohli minions once again return and say he's the GOAT, so good, blah blah and how 'he's too good not to score in WC because he did in T20s (where Samuels is also ATG)'. Kohli 'haters' call him out saying he's done zilch still.

4) Another ICC tourney happens. For some reason Kohli fails to turn up in the all important game....

Then this cycle repeats.

I hope for everyone's sake Kohli actually turns up, he's got another WC left in his prime. We need a new name at the best ever list. He also needs to do something in testing conditions like Dhoni did vs Pak in the JK wrecking havoc series...he's had the comfort of flat tracks all his life. All in all, he's behind de Villiers, Viv, Sachin, Ponting, Dhoni, Bevan as an ODI batsman. From just 2 innings missing in his arsenal, he can best them all.

 

[big_gamer007]

Kohli is good but will take Tendulkar any day over Kohli.. Kohli hasn't given me any memories to cherish which Tendulkar gave while growing up.. Maybe if he helps us win 2019 WC then I might consider him at par with tendu.

 

[JibranAnsari]

Not yet, Tendulkar is still the GREATEST, but kohli can get there

Kohli is already there , tendulker was never as good an odi batsman as kohli is right now

 

[Tusker]

No, because Waqar performed much better in many more ODIs with actual context in the 90s including various multi team tournaments. If Waqar only performed in bilaterals and went missing every time the stakes rose, I'd be calling out his record too, but as I said.. ODI cricket had much more context back in the 90s than it does now.

Hold on ... didnt you rate ICC Events at a much higher level than anything else ?

 

[Hitman]

Hold on ... didnt you rate ICC Events at a much higher level than anything else ?

It depends on the player in context. BTW, Waqar averages more than 31 in Tournament Finals.

 

[ToeCrusher2]

Kohli is already there , tendulker was never as good an odi batsman as kohli is right now

Clearly you haven't watched prime Tendulkar, Kohli isn't even close to the prime Tendulkar yet

 

[Proactive_]

Hold on ... didnt you rate ICC Events at a much higher level than anything else ?

I said ODI matches with more relevance and context to them are at a higher level than the vanilla bilateral ODI scene of today, which is true.

 

[Tusker]

I said ODI matches with more relevance and context to them are at a higher level than the vanilla bilateral ODI scene of today, which is true.

And you have clubbed Worldcup matches amongst Tri-Series tournaments such as Khaleej Times , Cola-Hajmola and Kitply cups ? Well Done

 

[Proactive_]

And you have clubbed Worldcup matches amongst Tri-Series tournaments such as Khaleej Times , Cola-Hajmola and Kitply cups ? Well Done

Still much more relevant than 95% of the ODI cricket today. The hierarchy is clear:

World Cups > CTs > Multi team tournaments > Meaningless bilaterals.

 

[Haz95]

It's blasphemous to mention Viv richards with Don V. Kohleone, let alone Sachin, Ponting or any other worthless dinosaur.

May Don Kohleone's reign stay supreme and impeccable.

 

[Tusker]

Still much more relevant than 95% of the ODI cricket today. The hierarchy is clear:

World Cups > CTs > Multi team tournaments > Meaningless bilaterals.

Therefore Madan Lal and Brett Lee > Waqar Younis due to their superior WC Record and Ending up winners , Waqar never even played in a WC S/F .

Link: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...e=100;template=results;trophy=12;type=bowling

 

[CanadianG00se]

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/player/42605.html?class=2;template=results;type=batting

He has scored fairly against all of them, keeping in mind that it wasnt easy to score in Australia those days like it is now.

I am not sure about Saeed Anwar being better than Kohli, but I am never convince that Kohli is classy like Tendulkar or even Dravid in tough conditions. I am comparing him to Younis Khan because both batsmen have made bulk of their career runs on flat tracks/dead bowlers.

Dravid is far better batsman than Kohli the test batsman. However, Dravid is not even closed to Kohli the ODI batsman. Dravid was legit an liability in playing 11 even during his play days (2000-07).

Flat pitches have been around for a while now in ODIs. Infact in late 90s and eary 2000s, India used to prepare flat pitches at home for test matches and Dravid benefitted mostly. But i dont see Kohli and co getting flat pitches in India.

But you conviniently ignored how Dravid and co played on flat pitches. Less we talk about Dravid the Odi batsman the better. I dont recall Dravid ever scoring impactful century in a game. He always played support role. Hiding behind Tendulkar/Ganguly/Sehwag/Yuvi.

Dravid is very overrated batsman(in Odis).

 

[akki]

Well some pakistani friends have bought one semifinal and final of champions trophy matches stats of kohli, though kohli has performed in otger matches.
i urge indian friends to lets attack their best bowlers . i am sure we wud be able to get some loop holes of those legends in finals or semi finals. And we would be able to prove ashish nehra or prasad better bowlers than wasim or waqar.

 

[Proactive_]

Therefore Madan Lal and Brett Lee > Waqar Younis due to their superior WC Record and Ending up winners , Waqar never even played in a WC S/F .

Link: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...e=100;template=results;trophy=12;type=bowling

As I said, there were many more ODIs of context and relevance being played outside of the ICC Tournaments in the 80s and 90s, which isn't the case now with the advent of the bilateral era which has basically rendered only the ICC Tournaments of any worth whatsoever. Obviously, if Waqar Younis helped Pakistan in many multi team tournaments to reach the final and eventually win them.. it would obviously supersede something which you are putting as analogous to that in today ODI era - i.e scoring huge tons in bilaterals. Simple. BTW, you still haven't told me what would you prefer- the ODI scene of the 90s or today.. I'm genuinely curious..

 

[The_Odd_One]

Dravid is far better batsman than Kohli the test batsman. <b>However, Dravid is not even closed to Kohli the ODI batsman. Dravid was legit an liability in playing 11 even during his play days (2000-07). </b>

Flat pitches have been around for a while now in ODIs. Infact in late 90s and eary 2000s, India used to prepare flat pitches at home for test matches and Dravid benefitted mostly. But i dont see Kohli and co getting flat pitches in India.

But you conviniently ignored how Dravid and co played on flat pitches. Less we talk about Dravid the Odi batsman the better. I dont recall Dravid ever scoring impactful century in a game. He always played support role. Hiding behind Tendulkar/Ganguly/Sehwag/Yuvi.

Dravid is very overrated batsman(in Odis).

Not true.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...0;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

Someone who scored over 7K runs from 2000 to 2007 at an average of 40 and SR of 72 was a liability? Only Ponting, Yousuf, and Tendulkar scored more ODI runs during that period.

Before anybody mentions his SR, let's compare his to other top ODI batsmen:

Yousuf = 74
Kallis = 72
Ganguly = 75
Inzimam = 76

In 5+ teams tournaments during this period, Dravid averaged 51 and in world cups, he averaged 57.

He was anything but liability considering he kept wickets too.

 

[Buffet]

Kohli is already there , tendulker was never as good an odi batsman as kohli is right now

Nah, taken together SRT was as good if not better in 90s. Different qualities for sure when you compare batsmen.

 

[CanadianG00se]

Not true.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...0;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

Someone who scored over 7K runs from 2000 to 2007 at an average of 40 and SR of 72 was a liability? Only Ponting, Yousuf, and Tendulkar scored more ODI runs during that period.

Before anybody mentions his SR, let's compare his to other top ODI batsmen:

Yousuf = 74
Kallis = 72
Ganguly = 75
Inzimam = 76

In 5+ teams tournaments during this period, Dravid averaged 51 and in world cups, he averaged 57.

He was anything but liability considering he kept wickets too.

Im not talking about numbers. I simply asked when did he ever played an impactful inning.
He was good as support role batsman more like Amla these days. He never was good enough to win a match on its own like we expect Kohli to do for India. Comparing him with Kohli is a joke. If he was playing in todays era, he wouldnt even make it to A team let alone national team.

 

[The_Odd_One]

Im not talking about numbers. I simply asked when did he ever played an impactful inning.
He was good as support role batsman more like Amla these days. He never was good enough to win a match on its own like we expect Kohli to do for India. Comparing him with Kohli is a joke. If he was playing in todays era, he wouldnt even make it to A team let alone national team.

2003 WC game against Pakistan comes to mind. Him and Yuvraj chased it down for India after Tendulkar got out.

Nobody is comparing him to Kohli. He could not win games on his own but calling him a liability is wrong. He had a role in that team before the emergence of Dhoni. After that he was rightly dropped.

 

[CanadianG00se]

2003 WC game against Pakistan comes to mind. Him and Yuvraj chased it down for India after Tendulkar got out.

Nobody is comparing him to Kohli. He could not win games on his own but calling him a liability is wrong. He had a role in that team before the emergence of Dhoni. After that he was rightly dropped.

Again you proved my point why i said he is good as support role batsman. That match was single handedly won by Tendulkar. No one will ever rate his innings over Tendulkar's.

When i said liability, i meant him as pure batsman. The only reason he was able to stay in team was because he accepted the role of makeshift keeper. But as soon as Dhoni came along, Dravid was shown the door.

 

[jusarrived]

Im not talking about numbers. I simply asked when did he ever played an impactful inning.
He was good as support role batsman more like Amla these days. He never was good enough to win a match on its own like we expect Kohli to do for India. Comparing him with Kohli is a joke. If he was playing in todays era, he wouldnt even make it to A team let alone national team.

Dravid was no where close to Virat , but he was nothing like Amla . Dravid played a lot of top class knocks chasing , he did have an all-round game though he was a steady batsmen in his approach and had he grown up in an era of T20s he could have easily adapted to current fast paced game . IIRC he has a 22 ball 50 , so he could have easily done better than a Rahane or even Rohit sharma who still bats at a 90s SR lol.

 

[jusarrived]

Again you proved my point why i said he is good as support role batsman. That match was single handedly won by Tendulkar. No one will ever rate his innings over Tendulkar's.

When i said liability, i meant him as pure batsman. The only reason he was able to stay in team was because he accepted the role of makeshift keeper. But as soon as Dhoni came along, Dravid was shown the door.

But without Dravids Knock we most likely had lost that game , so how did that not have an impact ? Tendulkar played a great knock , but he was out with still long way to go for the team . I wundt call that winning single handedly .

 

[CanadianG00se]

Dravid was no where close to Virat , but he was nothing like Amla . Dravid played a lot of top class knocks chasing , he did have an all-round game though he was a steady batsmen in his approach and had he grown up in an era of T20s he could have easily adapted to current fast paced game . IIRC he has a 22 ball 50 , so he could have easily done better than a Rahane or even Rohit sharma who still bats at a 90s SR lol.

Better than Rahane perhaps. Rahane himself is struggling in LOIS. Dravid maybe more consistent than R Sharma but there is no way Dravid would play long impactful innings like Sharma. Dravid couldnt take pass teams score beyound 260 on its own where as R Sharma..#264

 

[Tusker]

As I said, there were many more ODIs of context and relevance being played outside of the ICC Tournaments in the 80s and 90s, which isn't the case now with the advent of the bilateral era which has basically rendered only the ICC Tournaments of any worth whatsoever. Obviously, if Waqar Younis helped Pakistan in many multi team tournaments to reach the final and eventually win them.. it would obviously supersede something which you are putting as analogous to that in today ODI era - i.e scoring huge tons in bilaterals. Simple. BTW, you still haven't told me what would you prefer- the ODI scene of the 90s or today.. I'm genuinely curious..

It doesnt here is the stat for those non-bilateral knock out matches that you consider as the benchmark :

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...rnament_type=3;tournament_type=5;type=bowling



And if we consider tournament finals only:

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...rnament_type=3;tournament_type=5;type=bowling


From that we get Chaminda Vaas , Anil Kumble, Brett Lee, McGrath etc > Waqar

So if you agree that Zaman, Azhar are better than Kohli then you should also likewise agree based on your own logic that Vaas, Madan Lal, BLee, McGrath and Kumble etc are better than Waqar in ODIs.


as for my view on Bilateral vs tri series - It totally depends on the match. Both can be forgettable or memorable depending on what happens. Eg: Kohli 100 in 52 balls or Rohit 264 or chasing 350 after being 60/4 or Tendulkars Sharjah classics. Doesnt matter.

 

[CanadianG00se]

But without Dravids Knock we most likely had lost that game , so how did that not have an impact ? Tendulkar played a great knock , but he was out with still long way to go for the team . I wundt call that winning single handedly .

Again that is speculation that without Dravid's knock we would've lost. But it is fact that without Tendulkar's knock India would've lost.

 

[jusarrived]

Better than Rahane perhaps. Rahane himself is struggling in LOIS. Dravid maybe more consistent than R Sharma but there is no way Dravid would play long impactful innings like Sharma. Dravid couldnt take pass teams score beyound 260 on its own where as R Sharma..#264

I woudnt call those 200's as impactful innings , no wonder we have a difference of opinion here .

 

[jusarrived]

Again that is speculation that without Dravid's knock we would've lost. But it is fact that without Tendulkar's knock India would've lost.

Tendulkar opened and had he got out for a zero. We had 10 other batsmen and 277 to get .

Dravid came in at a stage with 4 wickets down . it was Mongia , Anil Kumble , Zaheer , Srinath and Nehra to folllow with 100 more runs to get .

So the first one is a sure certainty and the second one is a speculation ?

 

[CanadianG00se]

Tendulkar opened and had he got out for a zero. We had 10 other batsmen and 277 to get .

Dravid came in at a stage with 4 wickets down . it was Mongia , Anil Kumble , Zaheer , Srinath and Nehra to folllow with 100 more runs to get .

So the first one is a sure certainty and the second one is a speculation ?

So now ur saying Dravid's inning was more impactful? lol

It doesnt matter how many batsmen come after Tendulkar. He did his job and literally set a foundation for next batsmen to finish the game. All Dravid had to do was nudge around and get the runs needed. There were no runrate pressure. Whereas Tendulkar, single handedly took the attack to Pakistan scoring runs briskly.

Let alone Tendulkar's, even Yuvi played better innings than Dravid in that match.

 

[kingusama92]

What's absolutely hilarious is that People are getting absolutely triggered because some folks hold an opinion and the worst part is it's based on FACTS !! )

Nothing wrong with facts. But my earlier response showed how context is important. You were using "best of three" finals and defining them as knockout matches for Viv Richards.

And too many people keep moving goal posts. Here are a few examples.

1) Performances in T20I ICC Events don't count as pressure games
2) Knockout games against SL, BANG, WI don't count
3) All pitches he scores on are flat
4) He hasn't scored against PAK away (Is he supposed to make matches out of thin air? )
5) No match winning century in AUS, ENG, SA (even though it's not his fault the bowlers capitulated multiple times after he hit big scores)

This is clear bias.

Anti-Indian or Anti-BCCI or Anti-Kohli is for others to decide.

From my observation, he has two clear kinks in his ODI armor that are legitimate.

1) No stand out or "defining" performance in ODI ICC knockout games
2) No stand out performance in England (minus the 100 in Cardiff)

That's all.

Thing such as he can't handle pressure, he's a home track bully, or he's a flat track bully hold no merit.

 

[Leo23]

Nothing wrong with facts. But my earlier response showed how context is important. You were using "best of three" finals and defining them as knockout matches for Viv Richards.

And too many people keep moving goal posts. Here are a few examples.

1) Performances in T20I ICC Events don't count as pressure games
2) Knockout games against SL, BANG, WI don't count
3) All pitches he scores on are flat
4) He hasn't scored against PAK away (Is he supposed to make matches out of thin air? )
5) No match winning century in AUS, ENG, SA (even though it's not his fault the bowlers capitulated multiple times after he hit big scores)

This is clear bias.

Anti-Indian or Anti-BCCI or Anti-Kohli is for others to decide.

From my observation, he has two clear kinks in his ODI armor that are legitimate.

1) No stand out or "defining" performance in ODI ICC knockout games
2) No stand out performance in England (minus the 100 in Cardiff)

That's all.

Thing such as he can't handle pressure, he's a home track bully, or he's a flat track bully hold no merit.

and he is only 28 so he can double his achievements and also remove those 2 kinks from his armory

he will finish as the goat odi batsman without a doubt

 

[CanadianG00se]

I woudnt call those 200's as impactful innings , no wonder we have a difference of opinion here .

Scoring 40 odd runs of 70 balls is considered impactful but scoring multiple double centuries is 'soft runs' LOL.

So, going by your logic Rahane is superior opener in ODIs than R Sharma

 

[The_Odd_One]

Again you proved my point why i said he is good as support role batsman. That match was single handedly won by Tendulkar. No one will ever rate his innings over Tendulkar's.

When i said liability, i meant him as pure batsman. The only reason he was able to stay in team was because he accepted the role of makeshift keeper. But as soon as Dhoni came along, Dravid was shown the door.

No, you did not call him a good support batsman. You called him a liability.

The assumption that Dravid was on the team due to keeping is again wrong. From 2000 to 2007, Dravid kept wickets only in 67 of 225 matches.

Will you call Sehwag useless too because he was shown the door for Rohit?

 

[The_Odd_One]

So now ur saying Dravid's inning was more impactful? lol

It doesnt matter how many batsmen come after Tendulkar. He did his job and literally set a foundation for next batsmen to finish the game. All Dravid had to do was nudge around and get the runs needed. There were no runrate pressure. Whereas Tendulkar, single handedly took the attack to Pakistan scoring runs briskly.

Let alone Tendulkar's, even Yuvi played better innings than Dravid in that match.

As [MENTION=1697]jusarrived[/MENTION] mentioned, after Dravid and Yuvraj, it was all tail-enders and Pakistan had a good chance of winning that game had they broken Dravid-Yuvraj partnership.

 

[jusarrived]

So now ur saying Dravid's inning was more impactful? lol

It doesnt matter how many batsmen come after Tendulkar. He did his job and literally set a foundation for next batsmen to finish the game. All Dravid had to do was nudge around and get the runs needed. There were no runrate pressure. Whereas Tendulkar, single handedly took the attack to Pakistan scoring runs briskly.

Let alone Tendulkar's, even Yuvi played better innings than Dravid in that match.

if you notice I never said Dravids innings was better than Tendulkars , I said we would have "most likely" lost without Dravids innings . Tendulkar played one of the best knocks in a WC match , that dosent change the fact that Dravids knock had an huge impact on the games result . While we can never say for sure , India most likely would have lost if not for any of these three innings from Tendulkar , Dravid and Yuvi .

 

[jusarrived]

Scoring 40 odd runs of 70 balls is considered impactful but scoring multiple double centuries is 'soft runs' LOL.

So, going by your logic Rahane is superior opener in ODIs than R Sharma

Sometimes yes , if that 40 was scored when every other batsmen had struggled around him it means a lot more than a 200 scored batting first on pitches where par score was 370 .

 

[jusarrived]

As [MENTION=1697]jusarrived[/MENTION] mentioned, after Dravid and Yuvraj, it was all tail-enders and Pakistan had a good chance of winning that game had they broken Dravid-Yuvraj partnership.

Some one just has to look at the score card of this match , where I think Sachin played one of the best knocks of his career and what was the end result ? All we needed was 18 runs of 18 balls when he got out .
http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/13455/scorecard/416240/India-vs-Australia-5th-ODI/

 

[CanadianG00se]

No, you did not call him a good support batsman. You called him a liability.

The assumption that Dravid was on the team due to keeping is again wrong. From 2000 to 2007, Dravid kept wickets only in 67 of 225 matches.

Will you call Sehwag useless too because he was shown the door for Rohit?

Read my post #204 where i said he is good support role batsman. Yes i did mentioned him liability which i explained why. He didnt merited selection purely as a batsman, and was asked to be a Wk in order to be in team. As specialist batsman he would been liability.

Sehwag was shown door when he regressed. His hand eye cordination deterioated and become liability. But peak Sehwag won us many matches on his own which Dravid hardly ever managed.

Let me ask you onething, if Dravid indeed was so good then why was he shown door when Dhoni arrived? He could've played as batsman?

 

[CanadianG00se]

Sometimes yes , if that 40 was scored when every other batsmen had struggled around him it means a lot more than a 200 scored batting first on pitches where par score was 370 .

Again refering to that WC against Pakistan,

It was Sachin's knock that gave Dravid lot of room to play out some dot balls and get set. Imagine if say when Dravid arrived at crease and India needed 8 runs an over for last 12-13 overs, would you really think Dravid was the man?
Like i mentioned, Dravid was a good batsman to play a support role, never in his career he managed to grab the game by the neck and take it out of the reach from opponent. R Sharma have managed to do that on multiple ocassions.
The only reason why we have this debate on Dravid is how you rate him so highly whereas you always down play R Sharma without any logic or stats. Your reasoning is 'soft runs' LOL. Dravid is the one who always scored so called soft runs when everyone else around him had to lay the foundation. Im glad that BCCI dumped him post 2007 WC debacle. Now i hope they dump Dravid 2.0( Rahane) for good.

 

[The_Odd_One]

Read my post #204 where i said he is good support role batsman. Yes i did mentioned him liability which i explained why. He didnt merited selection purely as a batsman, and was asked to be a Wk in order to be in team. As specialist batsman he would been liability.

Sehwag was shown door when he regressed. His hand eye cordination deterioated and become liability. But peak Sehwag won us many matches on his own which Dravid hardly ever managed.

Let me ask you onething, if Dravid indeed was so good then why was he shown door when Dhoni arrived? He could've played as batsman?

Dravid was shown the door after 10 years of ODI cricket during which he was an automatic pick. Him, Tendulkar, and Ganguly were the first 3 names in the Indian team. You are also forgetting that ODI cricket in Dravid's playing days was not the same as today's. 270 was still a very good score. Dhoni is an ATG ODI batsman, just because he replaced Dravid does not mean that Dravid was a nothing ODI batsman.

 

[Cric1234]

Another interesting statistic about the current Indian team is Jadhavs average and strike rate although a small sample of 19 innings an average of 48 and a s/r of 117 shows the flatness of the wickets and of course his hitting ability.
Kohlis achievements are great but it's questionable whether he's better than his predecessors as his average suggests currently.

 

[CanadianG00se]

Another interesting statistic about the current Indian team is Jadhavs average and strike rate although a small sample of 19 innings an average of 48 and a s/r of 117 shows the flatness of the wickets and of course his hitting ability.
Kohlis achievements are great but it's questionable whether he's better than his predecessors as his average suggests currently.

Going by that logic

Starc should be rated much better than Wasim Akram.
Akram bowled during bowling era where wickets were in favour of bowlers, whereas Starc has to bowl on flat batting pitches.

Starc >>> Wasim.

 

[Cric1234]

Going by that logic

Starc should be rated much better than Wasim Akram.
Akram bowled during bowling era where wickets were in favour of bowlers, whereas Starc has to bowl on flat batting pitches.

Starc >>> Wasim.

Absolutely Starc in the current era is underrated in ODIs any good bowler is as it's very much in favour of the batsman currently.

 

[maxamax]

Dravid is far better batsman than Kohli the test batsman. However, Dravid is not even closed to Kohli the ODI batsman. Dravid was legit an liability in playing 11 even during his play days (2000-07).

Flat pitches have been around for a while now in ODIs. Infact in late 90s and eary 2000s, India used to prepare flat pitches at home for test matches and Dravid benefitted mostly. But i dont see Kohli and co getting flat pitches in India.

But you conviniently ignored how Dravid and co played on flat pitches. Less we talk about Dravid the Odi batsman the better. I dont recall Dravid ever scoring impactful century in a game. He always played support role. Hiding behind Tendulkar/Ganguly/Sehwag/Yuvi.

Dravid is very overrated batsman(in Odis).

True that Dravid also played many of his game on flatter conditions. But unlike Kohli, his 90% games were not on flat ones. and Yes Kohli is getting flat ones, spinners are not an issue for sub-continental bats.

also agreed that Dravid sucked as an ODI bats, but we're talking about the quality of batsman against unfavorable conditions regardless of ODI. Even Hafeez can strike a blow or two in soft games.

 

[CanadianG00se]

True that Dravid also played many of his game on flatter conditions. But unlike Kohli, his 90% games were not on flat ones. and Yes Kohli is getting flat ones, spinners are not an issue for sub-continental bats.

also agreed that Dravid sucked as an ODI bats, but we're talking about the quality of batsman against unfavorable conditions regardless of ODI. Even Hafeez can strike a blow or two in soft games.

Thing is Hafeez can not score 30 odd centuries in 180 odd innings. Pitch flat or not

 

[maxamax]

Thing is Hafeez can not score 30 odd centuries in 180 odd innings. Pitch flat or not

He can if you minus Styen and slight swing out.

 

[Tusker]

As I said, there were many more ODIs of context and relevance being played outside of the ICC Tournaments in the 80s and 90s, which isn't the case now with the advent of the bilateral era which has basically rendered only the ICC Tournaments of any worth whatsoever. Obviously, if Waqar Younis helped Pakistan in many multi team tournaments to reach the final and eventually win them.. it would obviously supersede something which you are putting as analogous to that in today ODI era - i.e scoring huge tons in bilaterals. Simple. BTW, you still haven't told me what would you prefer- the ODI scene of the 90s or today.. I'm genuinely curious..

It doesnt here is the stat for those non-bilateral knock out matches that you consider as the benchmark :

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...rnament_type=3;tournament_type=5;type=bowling



And if we consider tournament finals only:

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...rnament_type=3;tournament_type=5;type=bowling


From that we get Chaminda Vaas , Anil Kumble, Brett Lee, McGrath etc > Waqar

So if you agree that Zaman, Azhar are better than Kohli then you should also likewise agree based on your own logic that Vaas, Madan Lal, BLee, McGrath and Kumble etc are better than Waqar in ODIs.


as for my view on Bilateral vs tri series - It totally depends on the match. Both can be forgettable or memorable depending on what happens. Eg: Kohli 100 in 52 balls or Rohit 264 or chasing 350 after being 60/4 or Tendulkars Sharjah classics. Doesnt matter.

[MENTION=145164]Proactive_[/MENTION] no Response?

Look what happens when we sort that stat by Avg and limit it to min 20 wkts:

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...rnament_type=3;tournament_type=5;type=bowling

We get Bracken, BLee, Kapil etc >>>> Waqar (per your logic)

Look at Venky, Tendulkar, Nehra stats ....

 

[CanadianG00se]

[MENTION=145164]Proactive_[/MENTION] no Response?

Look what happens when we sort that stat by Avg and limit it to min 20 wkts:

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...rnament_type=3;tournament_type=5;type=bowling

We get Bracken, BLee, Kapil etc >>>> Waqar (per your logic)

Look at Venky, Tendulkar, Nehra stats ....

stats only matters if its used as per his agenda and the player is V Kohli.

 

[sachin100]

stats only matters if its used as per his agenda and the player is V Kohli.

Nothing more to add. U have summed it nicely

 

[zulfiqar]

Beast LOI batsman and if he does not drop his performance he will easily go down as the best ODI batsman of all time. This isn't easy when there are great names to have played ODIs.

 

[Tusker]

stats only matters if its used as per his agenda and the player is V Kohli.

indeed. something tells me there will be a no-show

 

[jnaveen1980]

Hey don't care what anyone thinks. I just love watching his unique and outrageous shot making. Anyone saw his four against Malinga in the T20. It almost decapitated the umpire. I can watch his stroke play all day. I enjoy more than Sachin's stroke play.Just behind Viru.

 

[kingusama92]

Hey don't care what anyone thinks. I just love watching his unique and outrageous shot making. Anyone saw his four against Malinga in the T20. It almost decapitated the umpire. I can watch his stroke play all day. I enjoy more than Sachin's stroke play.Just behind Viru.

Virat's legside play (between square leg and mid on) is immense. Turns his wrists and pierces the gap with velocity.

Straight drives, I'd give to Sachin.

He was shorter so it helped maintain balance with those shots.

I think the purest stroke making was from Sanga. Never seen cover drives played as well as he did in his prime. An unbelievable timer of the ball.

 

[Sidilicious]

Virat's legside play (between square leg and mid on) is immense. Turns his wrists and pierces the gap with velocity.

Straight drives, I'd give to Sachin.

He was shorter so it helped maintain balance with those shots.

I think the purest stroke making was from Sanga. Never seen cover drives played as well as he did in his prime. An unbelievable timer of the ball.

One word. Gower

 

[kingusama92]

One word. Gower

He was a bit before my time but Gower's highlights do show his class.