What's new

A direct comparison: Imran Khan's Pakistan versus Virat Kohli's India

He is not completely wrong. Imran did sit out of the Australian series because the weather in Pakistan was too hot for his highness, and his subject Miandad, who was not elite enough to be bothered by the heat, had to lead the team in his stead.

He also started to skip matches against weak teams after getting humiliated in minnow Sri Lanka in 1986, gifted them only their second Test win of the entire decade.
That’s highly deceptive.

Imran Khan refused to play in high summer with Pakistani umpires because he believed that it was an unfair contest.

He skipped the easy home series - NZ, Australia when they were rubbish, England - and actually chose only to play against more difficult opposition with neutral umpires.

Hence the 1987-88 English tourists were robbed in broad daylight by the umpires, and the 1988-89 Aussies were not much less unfortunate.

Imran actually cared very little for padding his own personal record. He judged himself and his Pakistan by their ability to remain undefeated in overseas series and to compete with the West Indies at home and away.
 
That’s highly deceptive.

Imran Khan refused to play in high summer with Pakistani umpires because he believed that it was an unfair contest.

He skipped the easy home series - NZ, Australia when they were rubbish, England - and actually chose only to play against more difficult opposition with neutral umpires.

Hence the 1987-88 English tourists were robbed in broad daylight by the umpires, and the 1988-89 Aussies were not much less unfortunate.

Imran actually cared very little for padding his own personal record. He judged himself and his Pakistan by their ability to remain undefeated in overseas series and to compete with the West Indies at home and away.
Let him bringing new theories here, I mean Doc .
 
I swear if this dramay baaz poster mentions that 1 test loss to Lanka one more time, I will go loco lol... get over that and find a better reason to deny any credit to Imran the captain/player rather than harpin on and on about the same game. Remember even Kenya has defeated India twice in ODIs with Ganguly/Tendu/Dravid and Co. in both those matches I think! It happens sometimes when the weak team/player get lucky on a given day, why do you think night watchmen like Saqi etc. end up being centurians?

This is his second biggest obsession after the ******** theory of his how Imran got run out instead of winning Pak the WC game against India in 1992 (he must have some magical powers to win any/all games for the team), something that in his delusioned mind started that WC losing streak against india; only thing left to say by him is that 'Imran did it intentionally and only he 'Dramay baaz' knows it for some reason!'
 
I have to admit Mamoons mental gymnastics are damn funny.

The ironic thing is that in general I do agree with his statements on most thing including this topic about the relative strength of India compared to modern team but he just goes an extra notch in his hurry to get in posts and stand out and then these obviously don’t pan out. Finally instead of just letting it be or admitting the fallacy his premature statements, he just doubles down and digs deeper holes
 
I swear if this dramay baaz poster mentions that 1 test loss to Lanka one more time, I will go loco lol... get over that and find a better reason to deny any credit to Imran the captain/player rather than harpin on and on about the same game. Remember even Kenya has defeated India twice in ODIs with Ganguly/Tendu/Dravid and Co. in both those matches I think! It happens sometimes when the weak team/player get lucky on a given day, why do you think night watchmen like Saqi etc. end up being centurians?

This is his second biggest obsession after the ******** theory of his how Imran got run out instead of winning Pak the WC game against India in 1992 (he must have some magical powers to win any/all games for the team), something that in his delusioned mind started that WC losing streak against india; only thing left to say by him is that 'Imran did it intentionally and only he 'Dramay baaz' knows it for some reason!'

Lol the funny thing is that this Sri Lankan team wasn’t even that bad lmaoo.

They drew tests in Australia and also were a good team at home in terms of competitiveness.

Heck most mainstream asian teams of the time couldn’t draw against Australia away and SL did when they were apparently the weakness minnows in history of the game
 
In the 1980s, the Sri Lankan side won against India and Pakistan. They also drew against Australia (away), England (away at Lords) and New Zealand. The only side against whom they did not get a positive result was West Indies. But the reason for that is that Sri Lanka did not play them in the 1980s.

And lol the poster had claimed that the Sri Lankan side of the time is equivalent to Afghanistan today :)))
 
Lol the funny thing is that this Sri Lankan team wasn’t even that bad lmaoo.

They drew tests in Australia and also were a good team at home in terms of competitiveness.

Heck most mainstream asian teams of the time couldn’t draw against Australia away and SL did when they were apparently the weakness minnows in history of the game
Wettimuny, Dias, Mendis, Kuruppu, Ranatunga, De Mel would walk straight into the current Pakistan team, or India, let alone Sri Lanka.
 
[MENTION=138463]Slog[/MENTION]

I am afraid the only mental gymnastics are by the people who want to assist that a captain with a Mickey Mouse tally of 14 Test wins (only 3 outside Asia) is the greatest captain ever produced by Asia. If that is indeed true, that standard of cricket in Asia must be excruciatingly low.

As far as the Sri Lankan draws are concerned, Imran fans tell us that drawing matches was common in that era, which is the excuse they use to justify his Mickey Mouse tally of 14 Test wins and only 3 outside Asia.

The fact is that Sri Lanka only won 2 Test matches in the entire decade. There must be a reason why they were not good enough to win against any team minus a terribly mediocre India and the so-called GOAT Asian team led by the Mighty Khan.

Excluding Sri Lanka, India and Australia were the weakest sides of the 80s. Both of them had a W/L ratio of 0.6, while the Sri Lankan team had a W/L ratio of 0.1.

They were, by far, the weakest Test team of the decade and it is futile to overrate them in order to excuse the embarrassing defeat Imran suffered. No amount of excuses, justification, revisionism and overrating of the SL team would change the fact that it is a black stain on the captaincy record of the so-called GOAT Asian captain.

Imran did well not to lose a series to WI in the 1980s and win two matches against weakened WI sides - a monumental achievement, but that alone is not a big enough achievement to negate everything else. You cannot judge a team, player or captain only by how they performed against the best team of the era.

If use that logic to deduce that Kapil was a better Test batsman than Imran because he scored a hundred in West Indies in the 1980s and Imran couldn’t cross 50, his fans will get upset as usual.

The bottom-line is that Kohli has already surpassed Imran as a Test captain. He no longer deserves to be compared with a captain who won a grand total of 14 Test matches (3 outside Asia) and lost to the weakest team of his era.

Unfortunately, Imran is a father figure for Pakistan cricket and our fans have a special emotional connection with him. Thus, they will not argue with facts but only with rhetoric. Even if Kohli whitewashes every single team away from home, they would still not consider him as a better Test captain because of so and so and so reasons, but these so and so and so reasons do not make up for the fact that Kohli has 33 Test wins already, while Imran would have to live three lives to better that record.
 
My g, we know you don't like IK so whatever he did, we know you will go against it. Kim Hughes led Australia lost 3-0 to Pak and people chanted "Kim Hughes ka urr gaya fuse".

Secondly, victory and loss are part of sports and they make sport beautiful and unpredictable and Junaids has actually written a very nice explanation directly at you for that defeat.

Stop being the hit and run poster that you have become lately, you are better than this my g.

Imran cited “weather” as the excuse for not playing against Australia. If he did not want to play against them because the Australian players were not good enough to be graced by his presence, he should have come up with a better excuse.

Kohli is a bigger player than Imran, but even today, he cannot sit out of a series because of “weather”. The fact that Imran used that excuse and got away with it sums up his personality and the lack of spine of our cricket board.
 
Wettimuny, Dias, Mendis, Kuruppu, Ranatunga, De Mel would walk straight into the current Pakistan team, or India, let alone Sri Lanka.

they all would fail fitness tests alone let alone get into india or pakistan. Literally none of them are good enough.
 
Imran cited “weather” as the excuse for not playing against Australia. If he did not want to play against them because the Australian players were not good enough to be graced by his presence, he should have come up with a better excuse.

Kohli is a bigger player than Imran, but even today, he cannot sit out of a series because of “weather”. The fact that Imran used that excuse and got away with it sums up his personality and the lack of spine of our cricket board.

Remind me who led the "padosi" team in the Asia Cup the last time it happened and what was the reason for captaincy change?
 
Remind me who led the "padosi" team in the Asia Cup the last time it happened and what was the reason for captaincy change?

He was “rested”. He did not say that he didn’t want to play because the UAE weather is too hot for him.

Imran doesn’t deserve criticism for resting in that series, but he deserves all the criticism in the world for coming up with the most obnoxious excuse possible.
 
Maybe Kohli rested because it was too hot for him to exert himself, just because he did not say it does not mean weather was not a factor. Lol at Kohli bigger player than Imran Khan. I lived through peak times of Imran Khan and now Kohli, and there is no comparison. IK was heart and soul of Pak team in terms of his all round contribution and commanding leadership, Kohli is merely another batsmen in the team, albeit a great one. His leadership qualities are debatable at best boosted by home wins on spin induced pitches against weak spin players.
 
Comparing Afghanistan of today and SriLanka team that beat Pak 😊
That SriLanka team would beat Afghanistan team 10 times out of 10 in test, ruling out any fitness concerns.
 
He was “rested”. He did not say that he didn’t want to play because the UAE weather is too hot for him.

Imran doesn’t deserve criticism for resting in that series, but he deserves all the criticism in the world for coming up with the most obnoxious excuse possible.

Awww only if Sethi ji was in power then. He would have dropped IK from the team to teach him a lesson.

Also, please show me Khan's statement on this where he categorically states that it's too hot for me to play in Pakistan etc. so at least I'd learn a few things.
 
The stupidity of some loser comparing comparing IK with Kohli makes the mind boggle. IK was a fast bowler bowling at 90mph+ over at least 10 year period,Kohli a batsman has relatively little stress on his body in comparison. IK had bowled for 16 years before he missed his missed series through a voluntary break. The problem with looking at stats when you are not intelligent enough to understand context leads to stupid conclusions.
 
Awww only if Sethi ji was in power then. He would have dropped IK from the team to teach him a lesson.

Also, please show me Khan's statement on this where he categorically states that it's too hot for me to play in Pakistan etc. so at least I'd learn a few things.

“For Pakistan's supporters, still savouring their team's success in the West Indies earlier in the year, there was disappointment at Imran Khan's decision not to play in the series as a protest over the timing of the tour. In his view, the weather in Pakistan at that time of the year was too hot for cricket.”

https://www.espncricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/content/story/153519.html

If you want direct quotes from 1988 when there was no Internet in Pakistan, you would need a time machine.

If you think this is fabrication, you should sue Wisden and Cricinfo for maligning the mighty Khan.

This is the greatest exhibition of arrogance ever displayed in cricket. Kohli is a saint compared to Imran.

It is not that the weather wasn’t hot. Of course it was, and the Australian players also complained about it. However, only Imran had the narcissism to actually sit out in protest, even though he was the captain.
 
“For Pakistan's supporters, still savouring their team's success in the West Indies earlier in the year, there was disappointment at Imran Khan's decision not to play in the series as a protest over the timing of the tour. In his view, the weather in Pakistan at that time of the year was too hot for cricket.”

https://www.espncricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/content/story/153519.html

If you want direct quotes from 1988 when there was no Internet in Pakistan, you would need a time machine.

If you think this is fabrication, you should sue Wisden and Cricinfo for maligning the mighty Khan.

This is the greatest exhibition of arrogance ever displayed in cricket. Kohli is a saint compared to Imran.

It is not that the weather wasn’t hot. Of course it was, and the Australian players also complained about it. However, only Imran had the narcissism to actually sit out in protest, even though he was the captain.

Again, an own goal Mamoon ji. Here's what the article says

"Perhaps the most ill-timed tour in Pakistan's cricket history, that by Australia in September and October 1988 was also one of the more unfortunate exercises in cricketing diplomacy"

Also, I'm not a blind fan but I will analyze the situation for you.

A cricketer at the fag end of his career sitting out of a tour that even the source that you are quoting says was ill-timed. In a time where the former president is recently assassinated/dies in a plane crash (whichever is the view), violent riots, and flood on-going against a really weak team (this was the weakest era of Australian cricket before their revival) and you claim that it's the worst show of arrogance ever.

Even if I believe it was just the heat, it's a protest against the board's wrong policies and a personal stance like your recent favorite Mushfiq who doesn't want to come to Pakistan because of security reasons. it's called "principle" and eventually, he was proven right as the series is looked back as a mistake in the annals of history.

Also, Pakistan won it so his absence really didn't cause much of an impact.

P.s. If you know where I can find a time machine, please help.
 
This thread is an insult to Imran.

Imran molded a team of mediocre cricketers into world beaters and ensured they stayed unbeaten for nearly 7 years..they won everywhere..(except austrailia and even then were robbed) we won just about everything under him.

Kohlis india has all of teh advantages, a board in charge of world cricket, favorable pitches , a cricket calendar in their favour, rules in their favour..I's like to see how they would have fared if the no bouncer rule was in force in NZ.. or even the west indies..
 
Again, an own goal Mamoon ji. Here's what the article says

"Perhaps the most ill-timed tour in Pakistan's cricket history, that by Australia in September and October 1988 was also one of the more unfortunate exercises in cricketing diplomacy"

Also, I'm not a blind fan but I will analyze the situation for you.

A cricketer at the fag end of his career sitting out of a tour that even the source that you are quoting says was ill-timed. In a time where the former president is recently assassinated/dies in a plane crash (whichever is the view), violent riots, and flood on-going against a really weak team (this was the weakest era of Australian cricket before their revival) and you claim that it's the worst show of arrogance ever.

Even if I believe it was just the heat, it's a protest against the board's wrong policies and a personal stance like your recent favorite Mushfiq who doesn't want to come to Pakistan because of security reasons. it's called "principle" and eventually, he was proven right as the series is looked back as a mistake in the annals of history.

Also, Pakistan won it so his absence really didn't cause much of an impact.

P.s. If you know where I can find a time machine, please help.

There is no own goal. Only your denial.

Imran refused to play because it was too hot for him. A pathetic and arrogant excuse. That is all.

Please don’t try to defend or justify something that cannot be defended.

Mushfiq’s excuse is more gracious. Imran’s excuse is the worst excuse for missing a series in history.
 
Imran is all time legend and gets picked in every team from the past century. Kohli is great at home but has a brain of 5 years old. His overall outlook and his performance away from home sucks. Imran is ahead by a country mile.
 
There is no own goal. Only your denial.

Imran refused to play because it was too hot for him. A pathetic and arrogant excuse. That is all.

Please don’t try to defend or justify something that cannot be defended.

Mushfiq’s excuse is more gracious. Imran’s excuse is the worst excuse for missing a series in history.

Mushfiq's relative played a part in the tour. How is that a gracious excuse? Is he the only one loved by his family?

There's no denial here except blind "pathetic" hate for IK from your end and that's about it. The guy stood up for bad scheduling, risked his career and lost money on it in terms of match fees and was proven right. It was a bad time for cricket and a needless and ill-timed tour and soured relations between ACB and PCB and that's how history remembers it.
 
Mushfiq's relative played a part in the tour. How is that a gracious excuse? Is he the only one loved by his family?

There's no denial here except blind "pathetic" hate for IK from your end and that's about it. The guy stood up for bad scheduling, risked his career and lost money on it in terms of match fees and was proven right. It was a bad time for cricket and a needless and ill-timed tour and soured relations between ACB and PCB and that's how history remembers it.

Skipping a tour because you are not convinced with the security measures is more gracious than skipping a tour because it is too hot.

It is not about whether Imran was proved right or not. The point is that as captain, Imran should not have refused to play because it was too hot to play.

He was the only player on both sides who had the audacity to refuse to play because of the weather, and I challenge anyone to come up with a greater example of arrogance and vanity displayed by a cricketer.

He did not risk his career or anything because PCB at the time was his puppet. If PCB was a strong board with spine who would not take crap from any player regardless of stature, he would not have pulled off that stunt.
 
Skipping a tour because you are not convinced with the security measures is more gracious than skipping a tour because it is too hot.

It is not about whether Imran was proved right or not. The point is that as captain, Imran should not have refused to play because it was too hot to play.

He was the only player on both sides who had the audacity to refuse to play because of the weather, and I challenge anyone to come up with a greater example of arrogance and vanity displayed by a cricketer.

He did not risk his career or anything because PCB at the time was his puppet. If PCB was a strong board with spine who would not take crap from any player regardless of stature, he would not have pulled off that stunt.

The lengths you are going to equate apples to oranges. Skipping a tour because it's unsafe only for one person and only one person. Nothing gracious about that, this is what total arrogance is and it becomes even funnier when his family person is already on the tour and the board head is pushing him to honor a contract.

A principle stand is a principle stand, Khan took one and was vindicated. Baaqi we can go on and on, I'm getting the hang of this.
 
The lengths you are going to equate apples to oranges. Skipping a tour because it's unsafe only for one person and only one person. Nothing gracious about that, this is what total arrogance is and it becomes even funnier when his family person is already on the tour and the board head is pushing him to honor a contract.

A principle stand is a principle stand, Khan took one and was vindicated. Baaqi we can go on and on, I'm getting the hang of this.

Skipping a tour because of weather is not a principle stance. It is an exhibition of uncontrollable narcissism and bullying.

Even if he did not agree with the timing of the tour, as captain, he should have had enough respect for his board, fans, fellow players and opposition players not to sit out because of something as trivial as weather.
 
[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]

Looking at W/L ratio to judge the competitiveness of a team in test cricket is very faulty logic. I would think you would know better than that. Draws are an important part of test cricket.
 
Skipping a tour because of weather is not a principle stance. It is an exhibition of uncontrollable narcissism and bullying.

Even if he did not agree with the timing of the tour, as captain, he should have had enough respect for his board, fans, fellow players and opposition players not to sit out because of something as trivial as weather.

IK is a leader not a follower. He changed cricket forever by forcing the PCB to appoint neutral umpires in 1989 against Ind, when the norm was that the home umpires gave the crucial decisions in your favour. The Homers cost him a series win in NZ, a historic win in the Windies and a draw in Australia, when the Aussie umpires suddenly changed their decision making rationale of not giving lbws on the front front as PK chased down a large total in Melbourne. It took the icc a few years to follow.
 
I suspect that a lot of what is going on in this thread - especially with [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] - reflects on Imran Khan’s politics.

I have zero understanding (or interest in) him as the Prime Minister of a country that I am never going to visit and don’t have any special interest in or affection for.

But he was a fascinating but autocratic leader as a cricket captain.

Much of what he did - refusing to play in high summer, getting sick of home umpires even in Pakistan, wanting livelier pitches - was to his detriment in terms of his personal record. But he did it for the betterment of the game.

Javed Miandad was only to pleased to take up the reins in those series, padding his record with LBW-immunity and with Qasim and Tauseef enjoying the opposite.

Imran was more like Keith Miller or Barry Richards - he couldn’t be bothered unless it was a genuine contest.

I admired that in him. I didn’t admire his bizarre obsession with Mansoor Akhtar and I didn’t admire his expulsion of Qasim Omar.

But unlike Kohli he bothered to apply himself to learn not just how to win at home, but how to avoid series defeats away.

Look at his series outside Pakistan from 1986 to 1991:

India - won 1-0
England - won 1-0
West Indies - drawn 1-1
New Zealand - drawn 0-0
Australia - lost 1-0

India have lost multiple series in SENA. Imran Khan’s Second Team (the 1985-92 one) lost one series there.

It’s great to know how to win at home. But it’s more important to know how not to lose away.
 
Kane Williamson has achieved more than Imran tbh. 18 victories in 32 tests.
Drawing away to the GOAT West Indians was a monumental achievement.

Winning away in England and India.

Drawing away in New Zealand.

A lot of home wins don’t outrank that.
 
IK is a leader not a follower. He changed cricket forever by forcing the PCB to appoint neutral umpires in 1989 against Ind, when the norm was that the home umpires gave the crucial decisions in your favour. The Homers cost him a series win in NZ, a historic win in the Windies and a draw in Australia, when the Aussie umpires suddenly changed their decision making rationale of not giving lbws on the front front as PK chased down a large total in Melbourne. It took the icc a few years to follow.

Imran was certainly a leader, his status as Pakistan’s greatest captain and one of the greatest captains of all time cannot be questioned and his role in the elimination of biased home umpiring cannot be understated. However, none of that justifies sitting out of a home series (especially as captain) because the weather was not to his liking.

Was the weather unsuitable for cricket? Yes

Did the Australian team manager complain about the weather after the series? Yes

Did any player from either side, except Imran, refuse to play because of the weather? No

What Imran did was an exhibition of extreme arrogance and narcissism, and a testament of his belief that he was bigger than Pakistan cricket.

With all said and done, and he should have had enough respect for his board, teammates, fans and the opposition players to play in the series as captain once his board decided to go ahead with it, regardless of the fact that he personally did not agree with the decision.

No player, including Kohli, would get away with such a stunt today. He would be blasted by the media like no tomorrow.
 
[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]

Looking at W/L ratio to judge the competitiveness of a team in test cricket is very faulty logic. I would think you would know better than that. Draws are an important part of test cricket.

I agree, but - there must a be reason why Sri Lanka only won 2 Tests in the entire decade over a sample size of 27 matches.

There must be a reason why they had by far the worst W/L ratio in that era.

We can dispute the relatively competitiveness of that Sri Lankan side but what is beyond any dispute is that they were, by a huge margin, the worst and the weakest team of the decade. The fact that the so-called GOAT Asian captain lost to the weakest team of his era is clearly a blot on his captaincy record and people should accept it instead of dismissing it with excuses and justifications.
 
[MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION]

There is no glory in drawing matches. Sports was, is and will always be about winning matches. The great West Indies team left a legacy not because they did not lose matches but because they were bloody good at winning.

The 1984 tour of England is considered the zenith of West Indies cricket because they went to England and squashed the hosts 5-0, instead of winning 1-0 or 2-0.

Imran and his team were hard to beat, but they were clearly nowhere near Kohli and his India when it comes to winning matches. Kohli has, by far, constructed a vastly superior winning machine.

Regardless of how many cross-era adjustments you wish to make to undermine Kohli’s India, how much stipulations you want to impose and how dismissive you wish to be because the other teams are supposedly weak today, the bottom-line is that a captain who has won 33 Test matches in 55 Tests does not deserve to be compared to a captain with 14 Test wins in 48.

What is more interesting is that Kohli has 12 defeats in 55 Tests, while Imran had 8 in 48.

Kohli loses a Test match every 4 matches and Imran lost a Test match every 6 matches.

On the contrary, Kohli wins 60% of his Test matches while Imran only won 30% of his Test matches.

The bottom-line is Kohli’s India is nearly as hard to beat as Imran’s Pakistan, but it is far, far superior when it comes to winning matches.

Again - being harder to beat outside Asia is irrelevant when you only have 3 wins outside Asia, albeit one of them against a brilliant but weakened West Indies side.

You can downplay Kohli as much as you want because the other teams are supposedly in transition while ignoring the fact that Imran capitalized on South Africa’s ban and the transition of Australia and India, but it is beyond any dispute that Kohli is simply much better at winning Test matches.

Imran’s captaincy record is not worthy of the GOAT Asian captain title when he only won 14 matches and 3 outside Asia in an era where a brilliant team was banned and two major cricket nations were out of sorts.
 
[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]
Your endless references to Sri Lanka 1986 have been put into context yet still you go on and on and on about it without reference to that context.

Imran Khan had regained the captaincy and rejoined the team after two years.

He inherited a talented but dysfunctional team, and his first six Tests were against a Sri Lankan team with brilliant batsmen (Wettimuny, Dias, Mendis, Aravinda, Gurusinha, Ranatunga) and dodgy bowling.

But his squad had a soft underbelly and of the 6 Tests they won 3, Drew 2 and lost 1.

This is WHAT CAUSED Imran Khan to change the balance and personnel of his team to make sure that it was incredibly hard to beat.

You disparage the team on the basis of the symptom and ignore the fact that he cured it. Six months later they drew a series against the West Indies.

Pakistan from 1986 to 1992 played 21 Tests away to their four major rivals. They won 5, drew 13 and lost just 3 of them.

France’s 1998 World Cup winners drew with Paraguay. So did Spain’s 2010 winners (who also lost to Switzerland in their first game).

It’s not great to lose a single game, but if you don’t lose that series, and then you make changes to prevent it happening again, why is that bad?

In contrast every Indian Test defeat overseas is identical, like Groundhog Day. They never learn, never change, never improve.
 
There is no glory in drawing matches. Sports was, is and will always be about winning matches.

You have completely negated the value of Test cricket with this statement. May as well remove draws from the equation, and blot out the records of some of the greatest match-saving feats.

There is a difference between a hard-fought draw versus serving up pancake pitches with dour draws, though.

On the contrary, Kohli wins 60% of his Test matches while Imran only won 30% of his Test matches.

A byproduct of Test cricket being a much more result-oriented game now.

During 1982-92, only 55% of Test matches had results.

Since 2014, 85% of Test matches have results.
 
Man, why is this discussion even relevant? Who cares?

Is it because Mamoon wants to prove a point lol?
 
[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION]
Your endless references to Sri Lanka 1986 have been put into context yet still you go on and on and on about it without reference to that context.

Imran Khan has regained the captaincy and rejoined the team after two years.

He inherited a talented but dysfunctional team, and his first six Tests were against a Sri Lankan team with brilliant batsmen (Wettimuny, Dias, Mendis, Aravinda, Gurusinha, Ranatunga) and dodgy bowling.

But his squad had a soft underbelly and of the 6 Tests they won 3, Drew 2 and lost 1.

This is WHAT CAUSED Imran Khan to change the balance and personnel of his team to make sure that it was incredibly hard to beat.

You disparage the team on the basis of the symptom and ignore the fact that he cured it. Six months later they drew a series against the West Indies.

Pakistan from 1986 to 1992 played 21 Tests away to their four major rivals. They won 5, drew 13 and lost just 3 of them.

France’s 1998 World Cup winners drew with Paraguay. So did Spain’s 2010 winners (who also lost to Switzerland in their first game).

It’s not great to lose a single game, but if you don’t lose that series, and then you make changes to prevent it happening again, why is that bad?

In contrast every Indian Test defeat overseas is identical, like Groundhog Day. They never learn, never change, never improve.

I am afraid there is no context. Just your flat refusal to acknowledge that the so-called GOAT Asian Test captain should not have lost to what was by far the weakest team of the era.

Pakistan’s team in Sri Lanka maybe dysfunctional, but it was still much better than their counterparts, and they should not have lost.

Besides, the notion that Imran learned from that defeat and made changes means nothing. At that point, Imran did not knew how the future would pan out, and he did not lose to Sri Lanka deliberately so that he could make changes.

If Kohli “learns” from this defeat, makes changes and ends up not losing overseas for a considerable time, would you stop criticizing him for this defeat? Or would you will still find new ways of downplaying his success? We both know the answer, so let’s not go there.

Not losing away from home is important, but I much prefer a ruthless captain than can win 33 out of 55 matches for me and creates a fortress at a home that is impossible to breach.

What good is avoiding defeats when you can barely win matches overall and end up with less number of wins than a captain like Misbah?
 
You have completely negated the value of Test cricket with this statement. May as well remove draws from the equation, and blot out the records of some of the greatest match-saving feats.

There is a difference between a hard-fought draw versus serving up pancake pitches with dour draws, though.



A byproduct of Test cricket being a much more result-oriented game now.

During 1982-92, only 55% of Test matches had results.

Since 2014, 85% of Test matches have results.

Teams play to win, not to draw matches. Drawing a match is certainly more preferable to losing, but I don’t see the point in advertising and celebrating draws when you have only won 3 matches outside Asia in your captaincy.

I agree that Test cricket is much more result-oriented now, which means that it is easier to win matches but also easier to lose matches.

What is incredible is that in spite of playing in a result-oriented era, Kohli’s India is actually very hard to beat. In fact, they are nearly as hard to beat as Imran’s Pakistan, who lost 1 in 6 Tests while Kohli’s India loses 1 in 4.
 
If Kohli’s India were losing matches at a rapid rate, this justification of result-oriented era would have been valid. For example, although Misbah won more Tests than Imran, he was clearly an inferior captain because he lost a Test every second game.

However, Kohli wins twice as many matches as Imran but loses at comparable rates.
 
Request Mamoon to stop defending our pathetic Kohli and Indian test team....as an Indian fan I'm ashamed of this team that they lost to such a small country like NZ so badly....Mamoon is going great lengths to support Kohli, but it is useless.....Kohli won us literally nothing ......no ICC trophies no overseas series victories....how can he be regarded a top player and this Indian team, the no.1 Ranking team....ICC should immediately ban India from playing test cricket overseas
 
Wah Dr [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] man gaye ustaad 🙋,Even Indian fans won't defend Kohli as much as you are, Really appreciate your efforts.
 
Request Mamoon to stop defending our pathetic Kohli and Indian test team....as an Indian fan I'm ashamed of this team that they lost to such a small country like NZ so badly....Mamoon is going great lengths to support Kohli, but it is useless.....Kohli won us literally nothing ......no ICC trophies no overseas series victories....how can he be regarded a top player and this Indian team, the no.1 Ranking team....ICC should immediately ban India from playing test cricket overseas

Be pleased with what you have. It is not normal in life for everything to be perfect.

India is not invincible, but they are still the number 1 Test team in the world, they will play in the WTC Final, Kohli is on his way to surpassing G. Smith as the most prolific Test captain and by 31, he is already among the top 5 batsmen of all time.

If you feel down about these defeats, always tell yourself that it could be far, far, far worse. If you are reacting like this when your team is one of the elite sides in world cricket led by a captain who is the face of modern cricket, imagine what would it feel like to be a Pakistani supporter.

The Indian fans need to lower their level of entitlement. Some of these fans would have stopped following the game altogether if they had the misfortune and the misery of being Pakistani fans.
 
Request Mamoon to stop defending our pathetic Kohli and Indian test team....as an Indian fan I'm ashamed of this team that they lost to such a small country like NZ so badly....Mamoon is going great lengths to support Kohli, but it is useless.....Kohli won us literally nothing ......no ICC trophies no overseas series victories....how can he be regarded a top player and this Indian team, the no.1 Ranking team....ICC should immediately ban India from playing test cricket overseas

ICC should stop being held to Ransom by this board as well
 
Be pleased with what you have. It is not normal in life for everything to be perfect.

India is not invincible, but they are still the number 1 Test team in the world, they will play in the WTC Final, Kohli is on his way to surpassing G. Smith as the most prolific Test captain and by 31, he is already among the top 5 batsmen of all time.

If you feel down about these defeats, always tell yourself that it could be far, far, far worse. If you are reacting like this when your team is one of the elite sides in world cricket led by a captain who is the face of modern cricket, imagine what would it feel like to be a Pakistani supporter.

The Indian fans need to lower their level of entitlement. Some of these fans would have stopped following the game altogether if they had the misfortune and the misery of being Pakistani fans.

You think you have this all figured out?

Australia, England and New Zealand are much likelier to be in that Final.
 
Teams play to win, not to draw matches.
And here we disagree completely.

In early 1987 England won the Ashes in Australia.

Imran Khan had two 5 Test series coming up.

The first was in India, where Pakistan had been beaten a decade earlier when Kapil Dev emerged. And then it would be a series away to England.

Both series were won: Pakistan won 1 Test and drew 4 in both series.

And I cannot exaggerate the level of triumph those two victories represented.

You say draws don’t matter. I remember Pakistan trailing 1-0 on New Zealand three years ago and being 1 wicket down at Tea on Day 5, but 200 runs short of the target with 36 overs to go.

People like me (and the coach) said “shut up shop, a 1-0 defeat is much better than a 2-0 defeat.” But the idiots went for it.....and lost.

Draws matter. Because defeats are shameful and to be avoided at all costs.
 
Last edited:
You think you have this all figured out?

Australia, England and New Zealand are much likelier to be in that Final.

how. the mighty England have to defeat india in India. Kohli is already annoyed as it is. Rofl can wait till teams tour india now. blood bath.
 
south africa beat india 2 - 1 in 2018. india win 3 0 in 2015. won 3 0 again in 2019.

so india won 4 matches and south africa 2.

in 2006-2011 era, India drew in south africa 1 - 1 and drew at home.

so 2 wins 2 losses.

so now I am supposed to believe 2 2 is better than 4 -2. Get the hell out of here and bury yourself in quicksand.

it's all about overall wins home and away. Winning away isn't everything if h2h is not in your favour in terms of overall wins.

take England vs india.
ok india won 4 0 in 2016.

lost in 2018 4-1

so overall 5 - 4 india win.

isnt that better than say 2 1 - 1 draws at home and away in a best of 5 series' ?

overall wins matter. Whether it's home or away shouldn't matter. Yes winning away is cool to add in your resume but that exactly why Smith's saffers were a bit overrated. They drew alot.

Smith's saffers lost 2-1 at home and 2 -1 away. so it's 3 - 3 overall.

that isn't better than a 5 - 4 h2h lead lol. basic maths. Not that hard to understand.
 
Imran was certainly a leader, his status as Pakistan’s greatest captain and one of the greatest captains of all time cannot be questioned and his role in the elimination of biased home umpiring cannot be understated. However, none of that justifies sitting out of a home series (especially as captain) because the weather was not to his liking.

Was the weather unsuitable for cricket? Yes

Did the Australian team manager complain about the weather after the series? Yes

Did any player from either side, except Imran, refuse to play because of the weather? No

What Imran did was an exhibition of extreme arrogance and narcissism, and a testament of his belief that he was bigger than Pakistan cricket.

With all said and done, and he should have had enough respect for his board, teammates, fans and the opposition players to play in the series as captain once his board decided to go ahead with it, regardless of the fact that he personally did not agree with the decision.

No player, including Kohli, would get away with such a stunt today. He would be blasted by the media like no tomorrow.


In the same era, Botham didnt even go to the World Cup in 87, Gower missed series, the likes of Lillee and Chappell took breaks. If IK wanted not to play, then he had every right not to play. Your bitterness has no basis at all except as some weird political dig and even that has fallen flat. Today it is called resting, then IK was just being honest.
 
You think you have this all figured out?

Australia, England and New Zealand are much likelier to be in that Final.

Let’s have a bet. Are you up for it?

India will be in the final.
 
In the same era, Botham didnt even go to the World Cup in 87, Gower missed series, the likes of Lillee and Chappell took breaks. If IK wanted not to play, then he had every right not to play. Your bitterness has no basis at all except as some weird political dig and even that has fallen flat. Today it is called resting, then IK was just being honest.

There is a difference between testing to manage your workload and resting because the weather is too hot to play.

Imran was not being honest, he was just being his usual narcissistic self.
 
There is a difference between testing to manage your workload and resting because the weather is too hot to play.

Imran was not being honest, he was just being his usual narcissistic self.

How? is playing as fast bowler in incredibly hot conditions not going to stress your body at the age of 34. He had every right to say no. Your posts make no sense at all.
 
Lord knows I loathe Imran Khan the man and the politician, but to downplay his captaincy achievements is utterly ludicrous. Kohli's India lose far too often away from home to be considered an all-time great side, and no amount of padding up statistics at home is going to change that perception. India could have had a cauliflower as captain and would still win matches at home given most teams' ability to play spin in the modern era.

Agree with [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] that India keeping on losing away from home in the same manner over and over again shows that the captain doesn't wish to learn or is too thick to understand the problem.
 
Lord knows I loathe Imran Khan the man and the politician, but to downplay his captaincy achievements is utterly ludicrous. Kohli's India lose far too often away from home to be considered an all-time great side, and no amount of padding up statistics at home is going to change that perception. India could have had a cauliflower as captain and would still win matches at home given most teams' ability to play spin in the modern era.

Agree with [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] that India keeping on losing away from home in the same manner over and over again shows that the captain doesn't wish to learn or is too thick to understand the problem.

so you are saying a 4 - 2 h2h win overall is worse than a 2- 2 draw?

india wins 3 0 vs south africa. south africa beat india 2 -1.

in the past, India drew away and at home 1 - 1 a piece. So because they drew away, it's now looked as a greater achievement? makes no sense if you can't dominate at home does it?

England won 4 - 1 vs india. india won 4 0 vs England a year 9r 2 before they last played in 2018.

Just say india won 1 0 in England back in 07 and then lost at home 1 0.

does that make the 5 - 4 win in 2010 era for the overall h2h worse than the 1 - 1 result h2h result in 2000 era?

I don't think so.
 
Just to add a couple of points.

In the 1980s, the Sri Lankan side won against India and Pakistan. They also drew against Australia (away), England (away at Lords) and New Zealand. The only side against whom they did not get a positive result was West Indies. But the reason for that is that Sri Lanka did not play them in the 1980s.

And lol the poster had claimed that the Sri Lankan side of the time is equivalent to Afghanistan today :)))
On that 1986 Sri Lanka series Mamoon refers to - some context would help.

Sri Lanka toured Pakistan in the winter of 1985. In Sialkot and Karachi, green pitches were laid out and Sri Lanka were hammered. Sri Lanka captain Duleep Mendis came back and blasted the whole tour for biased home umpiring (commonplace in the 80s) and doctored pitches.

Imran Khan wrote in All Round View that the Pakistani Ambassador wrote to PCB before the series saying that the atmosphere was not conducive for a tour.

The series was a revenge seeking exercise and even SL players like Wettimuny admitted the umpiring in Sri Lanka was biased. Pakistan were simply not getting any decisions while Javed Miandad had an object hurled at him by a spectator. The umpires themselves walked off during the 1st Test in Kandy. General Zia himself had to persuade Pakistan to continue the tour.

It was a different time and place hence why it's difficult to compare eras.

I suspect that a lot of what is going on in this thread - especially with [MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] - reflects on Imran Khan’s politics.

I have zero understanding (or interest in) him as the Prime Minister of a country that I am never going to visit and don’t have any special interest in or affection for.

But he was a fascinating but autocratic leader as a cricket captain.

Much of what he did - refusing to play in high summer, getting sick of home umpires even in Pakistan, wanting livelier pitches - was to his detriment in terms of his personal record. But he did it for the betterment of the game.

Javed Miandad was only to pleased to take up the reins in those series, padding his record with LBW-immunity and with Qasim and Tauseef enjoying the opposite.

Imran was more like Keith Miller or Barry Richards - he couldn’t be bothered unless it was a genuine contest.

I admired that in him. I didn’t admire his bizarre obsession with Mansoor Akhtar and I didn’t admire his expulsion of Qasim Omar.

But unlike Kohli he bothered to apply himself to learn not just how to win at home, but how to avoid series defeats away.

Look at his series outside Pakistan from 1986 to 1991:

India - won 1-0
England - won 1-0
West Indies - drawn 1-1
New Zealand - drawn 0-0
Australia - lost 1-0

India have lost multiple series in SENA. Imran Khan’s Second Team (the 1985-92 one) lost one series there.

It’s great to know how to win at home. But it’s more important to know how not to lose away.

And New Zealand never lost a Test series at home in the 1980s. Drawing away was a creditable result.
 
Last edited:
Lord knows I loathe Imran Khan the man and the politician, but to downplay his captaincy achievements is utterly ludicrous. Kohli's India lose far too often away from home to be considered an all-time great side, and no amount of padding up statistics at home is going to change that perception. India could have had a cauliflower as captain and would still win matches at home given most teams' ability to play spin in the modern era.

Agree with [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] that India keeping on losing away from home in the same manner over and over again shows that the captain doesn't wish to learn or is too thick to understand the problem.

The problem is that people go to absurd lengths to downplay a captain who has won 33 out of 55 Tests, and lost only 12.

People downplay the high number of wins because of “result oriented era” but conveniently forget that it is also easier to lose matches in a “result oriented era”.

12 defeats out of 55 in today’s era is bloody impressive and deserves a lot of recognition. This is Kohli bashing season and different quarters, including Pakistani fans, are venting years long frustration bottled inside them, but I don’t think he is getting his due credit for the success that he has led his team to since taking over from Dhoni.

If other teams cannot play spin it is not his or India’s problem, just like it wasn’t Imran and Pakistan’s problem that South Africa were banned and Australia and India were awful in the 80’s.

One can argue that even a cauliflower would have established Pakistan as a number 2 in an era where a top team was banned and two other big teams were out of sorts.

It is very easy to downplay the achievements of any team.

Nevertheless, Imran is a cult figure for Pakistani fans. A captain today can whitewash every team away from home and Imran fans would still consider his 14 Test wins and 3 outside Asia superior, and the true hallmark of captaincy.
 
Just to add a couple of points.


On that 1986 Sri Lanka series Mamoon refers to - some context would help.

Sri Lanka toured Pakistan in the winter of 1985. In Sialkot and Karachi, green pitches were laid out and Sri Lanka were hammered. Sri Lanka captain Duleep Mendis came back and blasted the whole tour for biased home umpiring (commonplace in the 80s) and doctored pitches.

Imran Khan wrote in All Round View that the Pakistani Ambassador wrote to PCB before the series saying that the atmosphere was not conducive for a tour.

The series was a revenge seeking exercise and even SL players like Wettimuny admitted the umpiring in Sri Lanka was biased. Pakistan were simply not getting any decisions while Javed Miandad had an object hurled at him by a spectator. The umpires themselves walked off during the 1st Test in Kandy. General Zia himself had to persuade Pakistan to continue the tour.

It was a different time and place hence why it's difficult to compare eras.



And New Zealand never lost a Test series at home in the 1980s. Drawing away was a creditable result.

If we start adjusting results because of biased home umpiring, it will open a can of worms. Perhaps Imran wouldn’t have lost in Sri Lanka, but then perhaps his Mickey Mouse tally of 14 Test wins would turn into Minnie Mouse tally of 9-10 Test wins, and someone like Miandad would come across as an inferior batsman to Pujara because it was impossible to get him LBW in Pakistan.

Pakistan was also a chief beneficiary of biased home umpiring. Of course, Imran deserves a lot of credit for playing a key role in the introduction of neutral umpires.
 
If we start adjusting results because of biased home umpiring, it will open a can of worms. Perhaps Imran wouldn’t have lost in Sri Lanka, but then perhaps his Mickey Mouse tally of 14 Test wins would turn into Minnie Mouse tally of 9-10 Test wins, and someone like Miandad would come across as an inferior batsman to Pujara because it was impossible to get him LBW in Pakistan.

Pakistan was also a chief beneficiary of biased home umpiring. Of course, Imran deserves a lot of credit for playing a key role in the introduction of neutral umpires.

Actually IK`s reign had far less controversy than you might imagine. IK had no interest in winning with help of homers, for example the loss to England 82, SL series in 86, Windies in 88 and Aus in 89 due to some "poor" umpiring led to him becoming an advocate of neutrel umpires. The 3 most controversial tours to PK by NZ in 84, England in 87 and Aus in 88 came under Miandads leadership.
 
The problem is that people go to absurd lengths to downplay a captain who has won 33 out of 55 Tests, and lost only 12.

People downplay the high number of wins because of “result oriented era” but conveniently forget that it is also easier to lose matches in a “result oriented era”.

12 defeats out of 55 in today’s era is bloody impressive and deserves a lot of recognition. This is Kohli bashing season and different quarters, including Pakistani fans, are venting years long frustration bottled inside them, but I don’t think he is getting his due credit for the success that he has led his team to since taking over from Dhoni.

If other teams cannot play spin it is not his or India’s problem, just like it wasn’t Imran and Pakistan’s problem that South Africa were banned and Australia and India were awful in the 80’s.

One can argue that even a cauliflower would have established Pakistan as a number 2 in an era where a top team was banned and two other big teams were out of sorts.

It is very easy to downplay the achievements of any team.

Nevertheless, Imran is a cult figure for Pakistani fans. A captain today can whitewash every team away from home and Imran fans would still consider his 14 Test wins and 3 outside Asia superior, and the true hallmark of captaincy.

By that token, the West Indies and South Africa are horrendous sides during this era so Kohli's wins against those sides should be devalued as well. I don't care about Imran's cult status among the delusional masses, but judging Kohli's captaincy by home dominance against shoddy teams is utterly simplistic.

Some of the backlash on here has been because of the bombastic hyperbole about this Indian team's position on the pantheon along the great West Indies and Australia sides. I don't even think this is the best Indian team of the last two decades.
 
By that token, the West Indies and South Africa are horrendous sides during this era so Kohli's wins against those sides should be devalued as well. I don't care about Imran's cult status among the delusional masses, but judging Kohli's captaincy by home dominance against shoddy teams is utterly simplistic.

Some of the backlash on here has been because of the bombastic hyperbole about this Indian team's position on the pantheon along the great West Indies and Australia sides. I don't even think this is the best Indian team of the last two decades.

Home dominance? no other team could obliterate teams at home like india can. That's why they are number 1.

Overall number of wins is what matters. Besides india also play the most amount of games. This more often leads to fatigue which isn't factored into this debate for some reason.

India are not as good as West Indies of 80s but the rules were pertinent to west indian style of play at the time.

Australia of 2000 played in an era without drs, no no ball umpires, lack of advanced analytics technology, unfit era where Aussies were literally the only professional team along with some other SENA countries. Look at the fielding level of Asian countries in 70 about mid 2000.

That's why comparing era's is pointless. You are only compared to those in your era.
 
Home dominance? no other team could obliterate teams at home like india can. That's why they are number 1.

Overall number of wins is what matters. Besides india also play the most amount of games. This more often leads to fatigue which isn't factored into this debate for some reason.

India are not as good as West Indies of 80s but the rules were pertinent to west indian style of play at the time.

Australia of 2000 played in an era without drs, no no ball umpires, lack of advanced analytics technology, unfit era where Aussies were literally the only professional team along with some other SENA countries. Look at the fielding level of Asian countries in 70 about mid 2000.

That's why comparing era's is pointless. You are only compared to those in your era.

rules like unlmited bouncers, no protection, no no ball umpires, raging seam friendly pitches all very conducive to west indian pace bowling. At the time they were the only fit and porfessional team along with probably England and pakistan to an extent under khan.
 
Mamoon is overeating this Indian team. He ovverates everything that is Indian.

Junaids obviously downplays everything an Indian or India achieve. Also he over hypes everything from the olden days.

Neither of these teams are great or the Asian GOAT test teams.

In my opinion this Indian team would beat Imran Khans Pakistan team just. Kohli is a better test captain than Khan due to him creating a dominance at home and sustaining a test ranking of number 1 for a long period of time. Don't care about this excuse of weak teams. I would love for Pakistan to be a number 1 test team. You guys who say this is a weak test era never mention how Pakistan have taken advantage of teams playing weak teams in bilateral T20s.

But if someone thinks Imran Khan team is better and he is the better captain that is their opinion and I can certainly see that point of view.

Mamoon you need to stop overeating everything that is Indian and Junaids you need to calm down with over hyping the olden days.
 
Mamoon is overeating this Indian team. He ovverates everything that is Indian.

Junaids obviously downplays everything an Indian or India achieve. Also he over hypes everything from the olden days.

Neither of these teams are great or the Asian GOAT test teams.

In my opinion this Indian team would beat Imran Khans Pakistan team just. Kohli is a better test captain than Khan due to him creating a dominance at home and sustaining a test ranking of number 1 for a long period of time. Don't care about this excuse of weak teams. I would love for Pakistan to be a number 1 test team. You guys who say this is a weak test era never mention how Pakistan have taken advantage of teams playing weak teams in bilateral T20s.

But if someone thinks Imran Khan team is better and he is the better captain that is their opinion and I can certainly see that point of view.

Mamoon you need to stop overeating everything that is Indian and Junaids you need to calm down with over hyping the olden days.

When captaincy is resumed by rankings and number of wins...
 
I had my interest spurred on by my observation that Imran Khan clearly analysed what went wrong early in his reign, while Virat Kohli keeps making the same errors again and again and again.

We all know that Imran was sent to do his A Levels at Worcester Royal Grammar, then went up to Oxbridge where he obtained a mediocre degree but in PPE, a subject I wanted to read there but would never have got in to.

But it explains his ability to analyse and rectify what was going wrong.

I then looked up Kohli’s early life - I’d never done it before. He was obviously born with some brains - his dad was a lawyer but apparently had lifestyle problems which dug him an early grave.

Kohli then left his decent school in the 9th Grade, and at his new school was an academic disaster - notably scoring 3/100 in a Mathematics exam.

It’s a very common thing to find gifted sportsmen with the intellect of a gerbil. Think of anyone from Paul Gascoigne to the Brazilian striker Adriano to Ronaldinho. Or Aaron Hernandez, the NFL murderer.

Reading about Kohli, it became clear that he has a similar handicap to Tendulkar. Both men are superb batsmen who are treated with fawning deference. But this means that people fail to notice that both men are not smart enough to analyse or improve their own game.

Last weekend Kohli’s response to getting bowled out in 68, 81, 63 and 46 overs in New Zealand was “we didn’t show enough positive intent”.

My first reaction was “this guy is either intellectually subnormal or too surrounded by yes-men for people to tell him that that analysis is moronic”.

But maybe this is a man who EITHER was born with a very underpowered brain OR has never been taught how to think analytically.

So maybe we are seeing Indian Test cricket underperform overseas because whereas the generation of Laxman and Dravid had learned to think as they passed from secondary to tertiary education, Kohli is either too unintelligent to think or else has never learned how to use his brain, and is now too big to learn.

I’m not sure that Imran’s team had any more talent than Kohli’s. But maybe Kohli hasn’t learned how to set his side up to avoid defeat overseas simply because he isn’t intelligent enough to understand that there is a problem, let alone to analyse what that problem is.
 
Last edited:
[MENTION=138463]Slog[/MENTION]

I am afraid the only mental gymnastics are by the people who want to assist that a captain with a Mickey Mouse tally of 14 Test wins (only 3 outside Asia) is the greatest captain ever produced by Asia. If that is indeed true, that standard of cricket in Asia must be excruciatingly low.

As far as the Sri Lankan draws are concerned, Imran fans tell us that drawing matches was common in that era, which is the excuse they use to justify his Mickey Mouse tally of 14 Test wins and only 3 outside Asia.

The fact is that Sri Lanka only won 2 Test matches in the entire decade. There must be a reason why they were not good enough to win against any team minus a terribly mediocre India and the so-called GOAT Asian team led by the Mighty Khan.

Excluding Sri Lanka, India and Australia were the weakest sides of the 80s. Both of them had a W/L ratio of 0.6, while the Sri Lankan team had a W/L ratio of 0.1.

They were, by far, the weakest Test team of the decade and it is futile to overrate them in order to excuse the embarrassing defeat Imran suffered. No amount of excuses, justification, revisionism and overrating of the SL team would change the fact that it is a black stain on the captaincy record of the so-called GOAT Asian captain.

Imran did well not to lose a series to WI in the 1980s and win two matches against weakened WI sides - a monumental achievement, but that alone is not a big enough achievement to negate everything else. You cannot judge a team, player or captain only by how they performed against the best team of the era.

If use that logic to deduce that Kapil was a better Test batsman than Imran because he scored a hundred in West Indies in the 1980s and Imran couldn’t cross 50, his fans will get upset as usual.

The bottom-line is that Kohli has already surpassed Imran as a Test captain. He no longer deserves to be compared with a captain who won a grand total of 14 Test matches (3 outside Asia) and lost to the weakest team of his era.

Unfortunately, Imran is a father figure for Pakistan cricket and our fans have a special emotional connection with him. Thus, they will not argue with facts but only with rhetoric. Even if Kohli whitewashes every single team away from home, they would still not consider him as a better Test captain because of so and so and so reasons, but these so and so and so reasons do not make up for the fact that Kohli has 33 Test wins already, while Imran would have to live three lives to better that record.

Every captain has some blemish in their record.

It is pretty silly to compare a captain just based on number of wins. Steve Waugh had an unbelievable number of victories yet nobody would consider him a better captain to Mark Taylor who had far less victories. You judge a captain based on how he improves what was before him and how he fares against difficult challenges. On that measure, Imran is better than Kohli.

Here are Imran's major achievements:
- Remaining unbeaten strong home record
- Winning in England for the first time
- Winning in India for the first time
- Being unbeaten against the best team of the era, WI in three series

The above level of success was unprecedented in Pakistan's cricket history till that point. No previous Pakistani captain since Kardar could dream of such results. Even when Imran lost in England and Australia they were hard fought series with the hosts having the clear advantage.

But judging a captaincy is more than just numbers. Imran actually built a world-beating team, groomed players like Inzi, Waqar and Wasim, and got a team that was historically difficult to work together.

Kohli is clearly an aggressive and dynamic captain but has India really progressed under his captaincy compared to earlier? Kohli has made India unbeatable at home which is a good achievement (though India pretty much only loses a home series once a decade so its not that huge a deal) and won a series against a weakened Australia away which also goes to his credit. But he lost away to NZ, SA and England which were all beatable teams. On top of that, in ODIs/T20s he has failed to bring home any trophy. His results are basically a mixed bag similar to worse to what they were under Dhoni.

But Dhoni had to deal with aging stars and newcomers when he started losing 2011-2015 while Kohli was basically handed a ready-made team. India was supposed to have the better team on paper so why did they underperform away?

Again, context is everything. Kohli, in terms of administration, support, team selection, resources, has everything working in his favor yet has not taken India to the next level. On that score, Imran > Kohli. Maybe Ganguly would be a better comparison.
 
rules like unlmited bouncers, no protection, no no ball umpires, raging seam friendly pitches all very conducive to west indian pace bowling. At the time they were the only fit and porfessional team along with probably England and pakistan to an extent under khan.



Compare those two teams results against WI to understand why we rate Imran's captaincy and team so high...btw, Australia was professional even in those days since Kerry Packer dragged them to the modern age
 
When captaincy is resumed by rankings and number of wins...

Also he has changed the mentality towards the fast bowlers by backing them and also the culture in regards to fitness. Indian players fully know the importance of fitness.

It's only my opinion. If you don't agree with it that's fine.
 
Imran's team was good but overrated here.

They couldn't beat an Indian team in 1989 which had a batting lineup so poor that none of the batsmen can be termed as good as Gautam Gambhir bar one- Azharrudin. Tendulkar was 16, so can't be considered. That team's bowling was so poor that Ishant Sharma will walk into that team being their best bowler.

Imran's team also lost to a mediocre Australian side in Australia in 1990.
 
Same is true for Kohli's team by different set of posters.

Kohli's team himself is quite overrated. The South African, England and New Zealand side that Kohli played away from home, he and his team could have done much better than what the results showed up.

That SA team wasn't terrible but it wasn't anything special and a better game awareness and better defense might have given India a series win over there.

In England, it was again poor cricket. Ashwin's inability to take wickets got exposed in that one test and in final test, Kohli's team gave up halfway allowing Cook and Root both to hit centuries and win that game. India could have and should have saved that series 2-2 if they weren't able to win.

In NZ, again poor cricket. Tosses are important but if you play poorly overseas you can't win games irrespective of you winning the toss.
 
Compare those two teams results against WI to understand why we rate Imran's captaincy and team so high...btw, Australia was professional even in those days since Kerry Packer dragged them to the modern age

dint beat several teams away from.home and lost to a weak indian team in 89-90.

Not good enough. wins is respected not draws.

Virat's india is ahead because they dominated at home alone by crushing teams. All you can say is imran travelled better.

ganguly's india travelled even better.
 
Kohli's team himself is quite overrated. The South African, England and New Zealand side that Kohli played away from home, he and his team could have done much better than what the results showed up.

That SA team wasn't terrible but it wasn't anything special and a better game awareness and better defense might have given India a series win over there.

In England, it was again poor cricket. Ashwin's inability to take wickets got exposed in that one test and in final test, Kohli's team gave up halfway allowing Cook and Root both to hit centuries and win that game. India could have and should have saved that series 2-2 if they weren't able to win.

In NZ, again poor cricket. Tosses are important but if you play poorly overseas you can't win games irrespective of you winning the toss.

south african team was very good but india could have won. They won the h2h battle of home and away 4 - 2 anyway.

Is that not better than the 2 - 2 draw we had overall in the 2006-2011 era?

That's how folks look at it but I agree winning away does cement Goat status.

Smith's saffers drew many at home and away but they had several series wins away from because they play practice games in red ball cricket prior to playing the official matches.

India under kohli rarely ever do that as no one plays county or any first class matches before playing the official series away from home. Mostly they just play t20 and odi matches as a form of preparation and that's not good enough.
 
south african team was very good but india could have won. They won the h2h battle of home and away 4 - 2 anyway.

<B>Is that not better than the 2 - 2 draw we had overall in the 2006-2011 era?</B>

That's how folks look at it but I agree winning away does cement Goat status.

Smith's saffers drew many at home and away but they had several series wins away from because they play practice games in red ball cricket prior to playing the official matches.

India under kohli rarely ever do that as no one plays county or any first class matches before playing the official series away from home. Mostly they just play t20 and odi matches as a form of preparation and that's not good enough.

Except that the South African Team of that period had as many as 6 Elite test players and Vernon Philander's addition in 2012 increased the count to 7.

The current SA team or the one India toured in 2018 had three elite test players( AB, Rabada and Philander ) at home and only two when they toured India( Rabada and to an extent QDk who was batting at 7 as his primary job is to keep gloves).
 
Except that the South African Team of that period had as many as 6 Elite test players and Vernon Philander's addition in 2012 increased the count to 7.

The current SA team or the one India toured in 2018 had three elite test players( AB, Rabada and Philander ) at home and only two when they toured India( Rabada and to an extent QDk who was batting at 7 as his primary job is to keep gloves).

doesn't matter. then I can say the same about west Indies's dominance in 80s vs weak india, weak australia and poor England.

australia of 2000 also never faced Virat's behemoth at home. They faced a weakened india and managed to scrape a win in 04. At their peaks they got destroyed in 98.

are you sure you are talking about the right south Africa?

south africa toured vs india in 2015 as well. They got spanked 3 0 and they had 5 or 6 ATG level players there too. Virat's india is a monster at home. They would beat any team in Asian conditions.
 
dint beat several teams away from.home and lost to a weak indian team in 89-90.

Not good enough. wins is respected not draws.

Virat's india is ahead because they dominated at home alone by crushing teams. All you can say is imran travelled better.

ganguly's india travelled even better.
India didn’t beat Pakistan in 1989-90!

The short November days made every Test a draw, but India only took 39 wickets out of 80 in the four Tests.

But Pakistan only took 60 wickets themselves, and India comfortably held on for a draw.

Imran Khan had just turned 37, and with Waqar raw, Wasim struggling with a groin injury and Abdul Qadir in decline, his huge workload basically ended his bowling career.

At the start of the series Imran was still bowling in the 135-140K range. By the time he reached Australia six weeks later he was down to the 125-130K range, and he was finished as a bowler.
 
Back
Top