Busting a myth - S Tendulkar is a better ODI batsman than V Kohli because he faced better bowlers

[Joseph Gomes]

Fact is, he didn't. Sachin's away stats against top 8 (excl Ban and Zim) was very poor.

Sachin was a HTB in ODIs, and was thoroughly dominated by the great bowlers during his era away from home.

Sachin Tendulkar away stats for top 7 (excluding Ban, Zim and associates)

Inns- 129
Runs- 4305
Average- 35.57
100s- 10

Now more interesting stats. Away average in respective countries

Australia - 30.83
England - 39.93
New Zealand- 38.35
Pakistan- 36.92
South Africa- 25.13
Sri Lanka- 40.92
West Indies- 54.50

Only one country where he averages above 50 is WI, which is inflated by two not outs (Sachin never scored a 100 in WI, surprise).

In 5 countries, he averages below 40, and less than 30 in South Africa (where he faced Donald, Pollock, Ntini and Steyn)



Link: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...orderby=default;template=results;type=batting

Now for Kohli's top 7 (excluding Zim, associates and also Pakistan, for obvious reasons)

Inns- 77
Runs- 3562
Average- 55.65
100s- 15

Away average in respective countries

Australia- 43.27
Bangladesh- 90.66
England- 32.33
New Zealand- 58.20
South Africa- 77.42
Sri Lanka- 53.87
West Indies- 55.60

Worst average is in England, and only place where he averages below 40.



Link: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...orderby=default;template=results;type=batting

Kohli away average - Sachin away average = 55.65 - 35.57 = 20.08

There you go folks, average difference of 20. You probably didn't know that Sachin padded his stats by bashing at home. So don't buy into the myth that Sachin faced better bowlers, because he got dominated thoroughly at their den. You can equalize any stats you want, the difference won't change.

Facing better bowlers ≠ performing against them. As for comparison to Kohli, it would be a joke

 

[Chrish]

Amla is better opener than Tendulkar..

 

[Pete Rose]

Amla is better opener than Tendulkar..

He is not.
Sachin's average jumps 12 point higher than career average in wins while batting second, whereas Amla is a paltry 3 point highers.
Add to that sachin has done a lot better in finals than amla

 

[Savak]

Tendulkar played in an era where almost all countries had gun bowlers in their bowling line up

In today's era how many great bowlers are remaining in comparison not to mention the big difference in ODI Cricket b/w then and now in terms of batting friendliness.

 

[Pete Rose]

Fact is, he didn't. Sachin's away stats against top 8 (excl Ban and Zim) was very poor.

Sachin was a HTB in ODIs, and was thoroughly dominated by the great bowlers during his era away from home.

Sachin Tendulkar away stats for top 7 (excluding Ban, Zim and associates)

Inns- 129
Runs- 4305
Average- 35.57
100s- 10

Now more interesting stats. Away average in respective countries

Australia - 30.83
England - 39.93
New Zealand- 38.35
Pakistan- 36.92
South Africa- 25.13
Sri Lanka- 40.92
West Indies- 54.50

Only one country where he averages above 50 is WI, which is inflated by two not outs (Sachin never scored a 100 in WI, surprise).

In 5 countries, he averages below 40, and less than 30 in South Africa (where he faced Donald, Pollock, Ntini and Steyn)

View attachment 78714

Link: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...orderby=default;template=results;type=batting

Now for Kohli's top 7 (excluding Zim, associates and also Pakistan, for obvious reasons)

Inns- 77
Runs- 3562
Average- 55.65
100s- 15

Away average in respective countries

Australia- 43.27
Bangladesh- 90.66
England- 32.33
New Zealand- 58.20
South Africa- 77.42
Sri Lanka- 53.87
West Indies- 55.60

Worst average is in England, and only place where he averages below 40.

View attachment 78715

Link: http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...orderby=default;template=results;type=batting

Kohli away average - Sachin away average = 55.65 - 35.57 = 20.08

There you go folks, average difference of 20. You probably didn't know that Sachin padded his stats by bashing at home. So don't buy into the myth that Sachin faced better bowlers, because he got dominated thoroughly at their den. You can equalize any stats you want, the difference won't change.

Facing better bowlers ≠ performing against them. As for comparison to Kohli, it would be a joke

Sachin averages 54.44 in all finals he has played in: sachin has played 40 such games
Kohli averages 22.00 in all finals he has played in: kohli has played 20 such games.
This is no knock on Kohli, he has time on his side.
For him to beat Sachin, by the time he retires, he needs to do better in finals.

 

[WengerOut]

Ah.. I get it. Indian legend v Indian superstar thread. Both set of fans throw mud slings at each other. Others adding oil into fire and enjoying the fight. All set go ...

 

[Stark]

And despite the heading of the thread, there have been, and there will be perpetual calls and cries of how two ball system and the adjusted power play ways has been hurting the bowling.

 

[Duckworth Lewis]

Busting this myth is considered as a sin. However it is important to come in terms with reality and stop seeing the past with rose tinted glasses. Without delving deep into the statistics I always felt this. It seems to be right. There is a lot more surety about winning matches in the Kohli era than in the Sachin era.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

Tendulkar played in an era where almost all countries had gun bowlers in their bowling line up

In today's era how many great bowlers are remaining in comparison not to mention the big difference in ODI Cricket b/w then and now in terms of batting friendliness.

And he was trash against the gun bowlers, hence his poor average. Average of 25 in South Africa shows how well he played against gun bowlers

 

[Pete Rose]

Busting this myth is considered as a sin. However it is important to come in terms with reality and stop seeing the past with rose tinted glasses. Without delving deep into the statistics I always felt this. It seems to be right. There is a lot more surety about winning matches in the Kohli era than in the Sachin era.

players are judged on overall stats, stats against tough teams, stats home and away, and stats in finals.
I would say Tendulkar is still ahead of kohli simply because he averages 30 points higher than kohli in finals. Kohli will get there, but not for now.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

players are judged on overall stats, stats against tough teams, stats home and away, and stats in finals.
I would say Tendulkar is still ahead of kohli simply because he averages 30 points higher than kohli in finals. Kohli will get there, but not for now.

Tendulkar is not ahead lol, he is at best equal to Kohli due to his World Cup stats. Kohli is light years ahead in everything else, regardless of era or bowlers. Tendulkar was pretty garbage against quality bowling anyway (25 average in South Africa, >40 average in all non-Asian country bar WI). Only place where Kohli has poor stats is England

 

[Savak]

And he was trash against the gun bowlers, hence his poor average. Average of 25 in South Africa shows how well he played against gun bowlers

Or the real question that should be asked is how would Kohli do against the bowler Teenda faced. I bet Tendulkar would average even better had he been playing in his prime from 2010 to now

 

[Indiafan]

Busting this myth is considered as a sin. However it is important to come in terms with reality and stop seeing the past with rose tinted glasses. Without delving deep into the statistics I always felt this. It seems to be right. There is a lot more surety about winning matches in the Kohli era than in the Sachin era.

which has a lot more to do with having a way better bowling attack

 

[Indiafan]

Tendulkar is not ahead lol, he is at best equal to Kohli due to his World Cup stats. Kohli is light years ahead in everything else, regardless of era or bowlers. Tendulkar was pretty garbage against quality bowling anyway (25 average in South Africa, >40 average in all non-Asian country bar WI). Only place where Kohli has poor stats is England

the tracks we have in SA etc now are flat as pancakes. In sachin era even a 200 was difficult by either teams. Now 300s are being scored for fun. Are you really claiming sachin would not have scored 100s on these tracks?

 

[Chrish]

He is not.
Sachin's average jumps 12 point higher than career average in wins while batting second, whereas Amla is a paltry 3 point highers.
Add to that sachin has done a lot better in finals than amla

Amla is more consistent than sachin ever was thus much higher average.

Rating sachin higher comes down to nostalgia and meaningless longevity on how he played thousand games just to create records

 

[Pete Rose]

Tendulkar is not ahead lol, he is at best equal to Kohli due to his World Cup stats. Kohli is light years ahead in everything else, regardless of era or bowlers. Tendulkar was pretty garbage against quality bowling anyway (25 average in South Africa, >40 average in all non-Asian country bar WI). Only place where Kohli has poor stats is England

yes, you are hanging your exclusively on one aspect of greatness, poor results in tougher countries vs. performance in finals.
I would take the guy with the better stats in finals.

 

[Pete Rose]

Amla is more consistent than sachin ever was thus much higher average.

Rating sachin higher comes down to nostalgia and meaningless longevity on how he played thousand games just to create records

amla is not a big match player compared to his current peers or past legends. consistency is not measurable in any meaningful sense to contribute to winning.
So here we are again:
In matches won batting second incremental average to career average:
Dhoni: + 51.53
Kohli: +37.7
DeVilliers: +30.6
...29 other players in between
Amla: +3.09

 

[Joseph Gomes]

the tracks we have in SA etc now are flat as pancakes. In sachin era even a 200 was difficult by either teams. Now 300s are being scored for fun. Are you really claiming sachin would not have scored 100s on these tracks?

No? He averaged 25 in SAF, he was trash against quality bowling. That's a fact. Kohli isn't a HTB like Tendulkar.

 

[giri26]

Tendulkar is not ahead lol, he is at best equal to Kohli due to his World Cup stats. Kohli is light years ahead in everything else, regardless of era or bowlers. Tendulkar was pretty garbage against quality bowling anyway (25 average in South Africa, >40 average in all non-Asian country bar WI). Only place where Kohli has poor stats is England

A batsman who is trash against good bowlers does not have an average of 40+ in every country played in tests. He is one of the very few players from sub continent to do so. Sachin opened the batting in the 90's and was entrusted with getting his team off to fast starts. When you play risky cricket against the bowling line ups of 90's, most often than not you are bound to fail which Sachin did. Sachin also played lots of cricket in neutral venues in the 90's which hasn't been taken into consideration here.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

A batsman who is trash against good bowlers does not have an average of 40+ in every country played in tests. He is one of the very few players from sub continent to do so. Sachin opened the batting in the 90's and was entrusted with getting his team off to fast starts. When you play risky cricket against the bowling line ups of 90's, most often than not you are bound to fail which Sachin did. Sachin also played lots of cricket in neutral venues in the 90's which hasn't been taken into consideration here.

I am busting the myth that he faced better bowlers thus a better batsman. Fact is, he was very poor against the good bowlers outside India. People in the 90s didn't have internet and they didn't know how bad Tendulkar played outside India, so their nostalgia is warped and based on misinformation

 

[Pete Rose]

I am busting the myth that he faced better bowlers thus a better batsman. Fact is, he was very poor against the good bowlers outside India. People in the 90s didn't have internet and they didn't know how bad Tendulkar played outside India, so their nostalgia is warped and based on misinformation

by this logic, is Misbah a better odi bat than tendulkar because the former averages 55 in S. Africa? or is paul collingwood a better odi player than tendulkar in odi's because he averages 45 there?

 

[WengerOut]

I wonder why the quality bowlers bowled better only in their own den. Does that bust the myth that they were quality?

 

[giri26]

I am busting the myth that he faced better bowlers thus a better batsman. Fact is, he was very poor against the good bowlers outside India. People in the 90s didn't have internet and they didn't know how bad Tendulkar played outside India, so their nostalgia is warped and based on misinformation

I did not need internet to know how Sachin played in the 90's as I watched him play through the 90's. He was a brilliant player and one of the best in the world. I don't think for Virat Kohli to be great, he needs to surpass Sachin. Sachin Tendulkar might have had poor record while compared to Virat Kohli but as a batsman, there is no comparison between the two. Yes Sachin did play better bowlers than Kohli in the 90's, his poor record is also a by product of that. He opened the batting and took on Ambrose, Walsh, Wasim, McGrath, Waqar, Donald, Pollock et all with none of the Indian top 6 even having a SR of more than 75, yes including Ganguly and Dravid. Only after 2000 when Sehwag, Yuvraj et all made their debuts did India have batters with good SR's which allowed Sachin to play his natural game. He was the only one who took all the risk at the top, when you take risks against bowling of such quality, you are bound to fail more often than not. If Sachin played like how he played in tests, he would have averaged much higher in all those countries as he did in tests against the same bowlers.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

by this logic, is Misbah a better odi bat than tendulkar because the former averages 55 in S. Africa? or is paul collingwood a better odi player than tendulkar in odi's because he averages 45 there?

Tendulkar averaged below 40 in all non-Asian countries. South Africa is just his worst.

 

[WengerOut]

Only in PP you will find specific type of HTBs , chokes etc

If you play well in T20 WC knockout but not in 50 overs WC , you are a 50 over WC choker.

If you're good in WC and not in CT , you're a CT choker

Now against ATG bowlers in ODI if one has a comparatively poor record but in Tests he has an unrivalled great records , still you're are an ODI HTB.
These PP ers are really good.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

I did not need internet to know how Sachin played in the 90's as I watched him play through the 90's. He was a brilliant player and one of the best in the world. I don't think for Virat Kohli to be great, he needs to surpass Sachin. Sachin Tendulkar might have had poor record while compared to Virat Kohli but as a batsman, there is no comparison between the two. Yes Sachin did play better bowlers than Kohli in the 90's, his poor record is also a by product of that. He opened the batting and took on Ambrose, Walsh, Wasim, McGrath, Waqar, Donald, Pollock et all with none of the Indian top 6 even having a SR of more than 75, yes including Ganguly and Dravid. Only after 2000 when Sehwag, Yuvraj et all made their debuts did India have batters with good SR's which allowed Sachin to play his natural game. He was the only one who took all the risk at the top, when you take risks against bowling of such quality, you are bound to fail more often than not. If Sachin played like how he played in tests, he would have averaged much higher in all those countries as he did in tests against the same bowlers.

That's why you have a warped nostalgia. Tendulkar played well at home and neutral venues but his away stats were very poor. Him facing Walsh, Ambrose, Donald, Pollock, Akram doesn't make him any better because he failed against them. Facing better bowler doesn't make him a better batsman, people need to get their facts straight. You watching Tendulkar doesn't make him a better batsman than he was. Nostalgia is a very strong thing, I know. BTW This is for ODIs only, not tests

 

[Pete Rose]

Tendulkar averaged below 40 in all non-Asian countries. South Africa is just his worst.

and some his peers were bad in other countries, whats the point?

 

[giri26]

That's why you have a warped nostalgia. Tendulkar played well at home and neutral venues but his away stats were very poor. Him facing Walsh, Ambrose, Donald, Pollock, Akram doesn't make him any better because he failed against them. Facing better bowler doesn't make him a better batsman, people need to get their facts straight. You watching Tendulkar doesn't make him a better batsman than he was. Nostalgia is a very strong thing, I know. BTW This is for ODIs only, not tests

How can you critique his batting ability without considering his test batting while he has scored runs against the same bowling in their own den on the same pitches? Sachin is a fantastic bat, and I am not warped in nostalgia as I respect and acknowledge Kohli and his ability but for me he does not have to be better than anyone to be considered as a great. Sachin is a legend of Indian cricket, a fantastic batsman and so is Kohli. No amount of statistics is going to convince people who watched Sachin play during his prime that he was a poor player.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

I am not warped in nostalgia as I respect and acknowledge Kohli and his ability but for me he does not have to be better than anyone to be considered as a great.

No amount of statistics is going to convince people who watched Sachin play during his prime that he was a poor player.

You just contradicted yourself in those two sentences. People absorbed into nostalgia don't want to accept facts. The positive memories become the only memories and the negatives are erased.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

and some his peers were bad in other countries, whats the point?

Read thread title

 

[Pete Rose]

Read thread title

your thread title is built on the assumption that greatness is judged solely on quality of bowlers faced as opposed to say, trophies one etc etc.
its a false choice title.

 

[Savak]

How would Kohli do against the following

Walsh and Ambrose

Donald, Pollock, Ntini

Gough, Caddick, Hoggard, Flintoff, Harmison, Anderson

Mcgrath, Warne, Gillespie, Kasprowicz, Lee

Wasim, Waqar, Akhtar, Razzaq, Saqlain, Mushtaq

Vaas, Murlitharan

Bond, Vettori

How many great bowlers has Kohli faced to be honest

Boult, Southee

Anderson (we saw what Jimmy did to him)

Johnson, Harris, Siddle, Starc

Steyn, Morkel, Phillander

This plus not to factor in how batting friendly the modern era is with flat pitches, no reverse swing, shorter boundaries and the decline in the quality of bowlers.

 

[cr7great]

I remember in 2010 -11 india won match by defending 180 runs against sa.
Such were the pitches

 

[giri26]

You just contradicted yourself in those two sentences. People absorbed into nostalgia don't want to accept facts. The positive memories become the only memories and the negatives are erased.

Nope it means that people who watched him play know how he actually played against good bowlers, don't need statistics to show whether he was good or not. I did not contradict anything.

 

[cr7great]

Mohammad amir has troubled him everytime with new balls which swing hardly for 2 over on flat pitches
Now imagine three good bowlers with a ball which swing 15 overs on juicy wicket

 

[Itachi]

The Zimbabwe team in 90s had heath streak, eddo brandes, Paul Strang, Andy flower, Grant flower.... That team would have beaten any team today. That was a really strong team and anyone who had seen cricket in 90s wouldn't object.

That shows the quality of cricket in 90s where not only one team but all had great cricketers.

Waqar, wasim, shoaib, saqlain.... And think about the current crop.

Who on right mind will compare these two era?

 

[Itachi]

Read thread title

Your assumption have a simple flow.

You believe that $1 bought the same product which it could buy today.

Yup disregarded the inflation and present the state holding 1 run values the same in both the era.

35 average once hold more importance than 45 average 30 years ago.

Thats called impact.

Apply this dynamic and you have a case.

 

[cr7great]

Virat kohli in odi in 2013-14 against steyn in prime and prime morkel
3 matches 31 runs on pitches which has swing fpr 10 overs

Tailunt sharma outscores him- 3 matches 50 runs ,
Mind u Tailunt faced new ball

 

[jnaveen1980]

We are putting down lot of good players purely with stats without any context. We just cannot conclude he faced x,y,z and scored so he is good. Doesn't work like that. Tendulkar was the ultimate challenge for bowlers all over the world in the 90s much like how Kohli is now for all the bowlers. Mindset was different in the 90s.

In certain aspects Tendulkar is better than Kohli and vice versa

In certain aspects Dhoni is better than both Kohli and Tendulkar

In certain aspects Yuvraj is better than Kohli/Tendulkar

In certain aspects Sehwag is better than any Indian player ever

Tendulkar's hunger, desire to perform consistently for long periods is one of the biggest motivation for all the youngsters for years rather decades. Reducing to mere numbers based on geographical location will not give the true picture.


http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/...ld-xi--princess-of-wales-memorial-match-1998/

This was a match where he faced Donald/Mcgrath in the same match

 

[cr7great]

Virat kohli in odi in 2013-14 against steyn in prime and prime morkel
3 matches 31 runs on pitches which has swing fpr 10 overs

Tailunt sharma outscores him- 3 matches 50 runs ,
Mind u Tailunt faced new ball

Here is link http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/batting/most_runs_career.html?id=8269;type=series

 

[Aman]

Kohli has already surpassed Sachin.

He just needs one good WC to go down as the undisputed ODI GOAT.

The only argument you can make for Sachin is inflated averages, these days guys like Guptill, Kane, Amla, Taylor, Root etc. are averaging really high, when in another era they would have been lucky to average 35.

 

[Chief Destroyer]

Don't need stats for this.

 

[Syed1]

The challenge for Indians is to defend Sachin but not put down Kohli either

 

[badxhah]

Different era different set of bowlers.Games has changed a lots since the days of Early Sachin.Comparison between the two greats is like comparing oranges and keeno .
Sachin in his earlier part of career was like lara in his latter part of career stuck in a mediocre team,still he found ways to score. U get Sachin out and match is won and in my books sachin lacked leadership qualities and hence in his captaincy lacked big time. Plus was a not a finisher,even 30 runs required u get sachin the other teams fancied their chances.
Mr.Kholi tick all the boxed the mr.Sachin never ticked.Good captain and probably the best chaser and finisher the game has ever seen. Would have still scored against ambores walsh macgrath and 2Ws because great players always find a way to scores against quality attacks.

 

[Anuj25]

Fortunately the match is not played on paper
.
Pakpassion.net is a great forum but if you have to analyse it statistically, the bad/nonsensical post far outweigh the good post.
So what makes it a good forum??One needs to experience it to understand it .

Similarly one have to watch the career of great players to understand what makes/made them Great. The struggles, the hard work, dedication, pressure and the way they overcome them cannot be understood in statistics.

 

[Buffet]

Tendulkar is not ahead lol, he is at best equal to Kohli due to his World Cup stats. Kohli is light years ahead in everything else, regardless of era or bowlers. Tendulkar was pretty garbage against quality bowling anyway (25 average in South Africa, >40 average in all non-Asian country bar WI). Only place where Kohli has poor stats is England

It's clear that you have not seen SRT. To put your stats in context, he batted at lower down the order without any ton for 70-80 ODI's. Indians used to be done and dusted by the time he used to come to bat. His job was to score quick 30-40 runs.

You need to see his record as opener. His lowest average against home teams in their den will be in SA and Aus with averaging in lower 30s. Everywhere else as an opener he averaged around 40 even in away matches.

Now if you think averaging lower 30s against SA and Aus in their den with all those bowlers without advantage of new rules was a very poor record then,

1994-2011 - When SRT averaged lower 30s in Aus/SA against Aus/SA,

Lara was one of the best in 90s in ODI. Lara averaged 32 against those two teams in their den in the same period.

 

[LastManstanding]

It's clear that you have not seen SRT. To put your stats in context, he batted at lower down the order without any ton for 70-80 ODI's. Indians used to be done and dusted by the time he used to come to bat. His job was to score quick 30-40 runs.

You need to see his record as opener. His lowest average against home teams in their den will be in SA and Aus with averaging in lower 30s. Everywhere else as an opener he averaged around 40 even in away matches.

Now if you think averaging lower 30s against SA and Aus in their den with all those bowlers without advantage of new rules was a very poor record then,

1994-2011 - When SRT averaged lower 30s in Aus/SA against Aus/SA,

Lara was one of the best in 90s in ODI. Lara averaged 32 against those two teams in their den in the same period.

Came here to say this. Plus you have got to remember Sachin himself and whatever new captain came, experimented with Sachin at 4(something Sachin didnt enjoy) to strengthen the middle order. Be it world cup 99, Ind/Pak/Aus tri series in 99, SA 2001, Natwest tournament 2002 or the world cup 2007. Low scores in these matches dented his overseas stats.

 

[CadPakFan]

And he was trash against the gun bowlers, hence his poor average. Average of 25 in South Africa shows how well he played against gun bowlers

But Virat can't even runs against average bowlers, he only scored five in the CT final against a "average" bowler.

 

[Buffet]

Just to put it in context for younger PPers,

1990s - average runs in each inning in Aus - 195

I am eyeballing the calculations here, but it's roughly right. That 195 included Aus batting in their home conditions.


Indians average innings in Aus in 90s- 176 runs


Pretty much all teams, except Aus, will have lower than 195 runs in each inning in Aus .


Clearly, ODI games have changed a lot and it's futile to simply take average across eras in ODI and start comparing players. You can surely make a point, but direct comparison of average is meaningless in the ODI format when you take different generations.

 

[Buffet]

Just to get an idea , look at what Kohli did in previous tour of SA when pitch had more assistance for pacers. Don't look at average or anything, simply watch replay of those matches. SRT faced similar situations, but even better ODI bowlers in Donald and Pollock.

 

[BreadPakoda]

Pre 20-20 era cricket (especially 90s) was much more competitive. Bowlers were much more talented. Only those who’ve lived through those times would know.
Hardly 2-3 batsmen averaged 40+ and even those had SR of 60-80.

 

[Cryin Out Loud]

Busting a myth - S Tendulkar is a better ODI batsman than V Kohli because he faced better bowlers

I'm not sure OP has busted this so called myth.

I may be wrong, but to me the only logical way to bust this alleged myth would be to prove the opposite- that he did not face better bowlers.

Instead OP's proof seems to be that Sachin had a lower ODI average abroad than Kohli.

So what?

If you want top bust a myth that "S Tendulkar is a better ODI batsman than V Kohli because he faced better bowlers", you need to show that he did not face better bowlers. Then get into stats.

 

[JattMaula]

Poor thread. Kholi is in purple patch nothing more. Sachin sabki kehke leta tha.

 

[Titan24]

Pitch conditions and two new balls rule is also to be taken into account to when making any judgement.

Reverse swing being eliminated in ODIs other then few exceptions mostly from Pakistan who still manage to get some even with two new balls. Also doosra is now extinct from cricket.

Just to give more weight to my above statements, I guess you guys know that all 200s have been scored in the span of last 6,7 years.

 

[RainMan_]

Sachin is easily the best cricket player ever. Viv is a close second. As for virat Kohli, I don't think he has achieved enough to be compared with someone like Tendulkar who's the greatest player of all time.

But yes, kohli has a strong possibility of surpassing him if he can maintain his current form for another 3/4 years and perform well in world cup.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Lol it seems OP isn't getting the kind of support he was expecting.

As far as batting is concerned the queue starts after Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar in India.

 

[indipper]

We all saw Kohli's actual average in CT final. This is where Sachin has built his "lesser" one for 50% of his games atleast.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

I'm not sure OP has busted this so called myth.

I may be wrong, but to me the only logical way to bust this alleged myth would be to prove the opposite- that he did not face better bowlers.

Instead OP's proof seems to be that Sachin had a lower ODI average abroad than Kohli.

So what?

If you want top bust a myth that "S Tendulkar is a better ODI batsman than V Kohli because he faced better bowlers", you need to show that he did not face better bowlers. Then get into stats.

Exactly this. OP created this thread because I presented a list of great bowlers Sachin faced and according to them having a sub average of 35 against those great bowlers is poor. When asked about the great bowlers that Kohli dominated in his era I got a list including :

Rabada (who hasn't even reached his peak yet)
Johnson (world knows how consistent he was in ODIs)
Malinga (he was good but Kohli didn't play him in his peak)
Boult (LOL)

Compare this to Sachin who have played against

Wasim
Waqar
Shoaib
Saqlain
Donald
Pollock
Mcgrath
Lee
Warne
Muralitharan
Vettori
Imran Khan
Walsh
Ambrose

Most of these players started their career after Sachin made his debut, they reached their peak and retired before Sachin.

 

[Oligochaetes]

Ermmm...
What were India's team totals during Sachin's times? Just want to know. I normally don't like to get into such Mud slinging debates.
Also bowler averages. That might give some picture. Or maybe it wont. I don't know.
During Sachins era scoring 300 was rare. Teams didn't prepare 300 run pitches.

But you cannot bring down virat's achievements as well as he is doing better than any other batsman in his era.

 

[Hasan123]

Sachin is still a great batsmen and in tests he is well ahead of Kohli. But in LO, overtime I think Kohli will surpass him in this format.

Sachin faced quality bowlers and scored against them. Also he was the main run scorer and also had a poor bowling attack. No need to downplay Sachin to make Kohli look good.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

Lol it seems OP isn't getting the kind of support he was expecting.

As far as batting is concerned the queue starts after Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar in India.

Lol I didn't create this for support. People deluded by nostalgia will always speak the loudest. Still gotta bust the myth and inaccurate facts.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Lol I didn't create this for support. People deluded by nostalgia will always speak the loudest. Still gotta bust the myth and inaccurate facts.

Looks like something else got busted here. Anyway carry on. This is a funny thread.

 

[AMSS]

The challenge for Indians is to defend Sachin but not put down Kohli either

Indias would love to be 'cursed' with such challenges for years to come. Don't see them complaining.

 

[jagatk]

Lol I didn't create this for support. People deluded by nostalgia will always speak the loudest. Still gotta bust the myth and inaccurate facts.

It's funny how you call SRT a HTB and have the gall to call others deluded. You have clearly never watched India in the 90's or for that matter any cricket pre 2000's. So why don't you stick to what you might know rather than commenting on stuff you have no real knowledge of.

 

[Ab Fan]

Both SRT and Kohli have padded their stats outside Asia against not so top bowling. We all know that.

 

[Smbhayi]

lol at OP. in pre 2000s 240+ considers winning score, now today's era it's walk in the park.

 

[Ab Fan]

Well said OP.

Also, SRT= ABD in odis. Both have performed in WC but have tough time under big pressure moments.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Well said OP.

Also, SRT= ABD in odis. Both have performed in WC but have tough time under big pressure moments.

AB never took South Africa to World Cup finals single handedly like Sachin did in 2003 and 2011 World Cups.

 

[Ab Fan]

AB never took South Africa to World Cup finals single handedly like Sachin did in 2003 and 2011 World Cups.

Winning is a function of team not individuals.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Lol I didn't create this for support. People deluded by nostalgia will always speak the loudest. Still gotta bust the myth and inaccurate facts.

Nostalgia? They played together for a while lol

 

[jnaveen1980]

Matches played by KOhli/Sachin together

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...nvolve_type=all;template=results;type=batting

Almost nearly identical stats despite Tendulkar was going out.

 

[New Yorker]

AB never took South Africa to World Cup finals single handedly like Sachin did in 2003 and 2011 World Cups.

No player ever takes a team "singlehandedly" to a World Cup.

 

[New Yorker]

Matches played by KOhli/Sachin together

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...nvolve_type=all;template=results;type=batting

Almost nearly identical stats despite Tendulkar was going out.

Perhaps, but Kohli was not yet King Kohli. He has become markedly better in the past two years. By now there is hardly any comparison.

 

[Ted123]

And which attacks, Kohli has scored against?

 

[jnaveen1980]

Perhaps, but Kohli was not yet King Kohli. He has become markedly better in the past two years. By now there is hardly any comparison.

Tendulkar was not also king TEndulkar.

 

[troodon]

Kohli has passed Sachin already in my book in LOI cricket. Not because Kohli is more talented. But because Kohli has the will to win at any cost. He can handle the pressure of tight situations better than Sachin IMO.

Sachin played in an era full of great bowlers and he used to open. The chances of getting out to someone like McGrath/Donald/Pollock/Ntini/Wasim/Waqar/Shoaib/Vaas/Gough/Lee/Steyn were a lot higher than getting out to todays bowlers like Morkel/Lakmal/Amir/Washed up Malinga/Hazlewood/Phelukawayo and plethora of lesser talented bowlers.
Another thing that Sachin had to face was the burden of expectations and the pressure to perform that Kohli has not faced much. In the 90's, it was all Sachin or bust for India. Even if Sachin performs with the bat, the bowling was always poor except for Srinath and Kumble. 2 out of 5 bowlers were good. The rest like Prasad, Kuruvillaa, Mohanty, Robin Singh, Nilesh Kulkarni were not good enough.

Both are great players, but I would pick Kohli in my team over Sachin purely based on Kohli's will to succeed and win. Kohli is also relentless. He would have surely succeeded in the 90's era too. May be not this successful, but he would have been equally as effective if not more than Sachin.

Last but not the least, Kohli is a super fit athlete. I have seen Sachin cramping up just when India was at the door of victory and getting out. If Sachin had better fitness, he would have won a few historic victories for India.

Anyways, for me, Kohli > Sachin in LOI format. It will only be a matter of 3 or 4 years before Kohli reaches 50 centuries. He is scoring 5 or 6 centuries a year and he is in his prime. Kohli needs just 16 more centuries to get past Sachin. So it could be under 3 years too.

 

[New Yorker]

And which attacks, Kohli has scored against?

The same attacks everyone else of his era has not scored as much or as often against.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

Winning is a function of team not individuals.

Then why blame Sachin for not scoring in the finals?

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

No player ever takes a team "singlehandedly" to a World Cup.

This is why its important to watch those matches before commenting here.

 

[Ab Fan]

Then why blame Sachin for not scoring in the finals?

Good point. There will be few failures over plenty of successes.