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

[VijayTamilan]

Different eras. One doesn't have to denigrate one of these batsmen to project the other's greatness.
Also, I consider ICC's T20 WC's to be as taxing temperamentally as the other WC's are. Hence, just because Kohli failed in the 2015 KO matches and the CT17 final, I wouldn't question his LOI ICC Tournament capabilities; he was the MOM of the 2013 CT final, and has been stupendous in the WCT20s after all.

 

[New Yorker]

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

Since Sachin didn't take all the wickets, no it is not.

 

[Ab Fan]

Different eras. One doesn't have to denigrate one of these batsmen to project the other's greatness.
Also, I consider ICC's T20 WC's to be as taxing temperamentally as the other WC's are. Hence, just because Kohli failed in the 2015 KO matches and the CT17 final, I wouldn't question his LOI ICC Tournament capabilities; he was the MOM of the 2013 CT final, and has been stupendous in the WCT20s after all.

Jadeja was MOM in CT 2013 final. 33* under pressure and a 4 over-24 runs with 2 wickets spell.

 

[Shutdown Corner]

Tendulkar in general is an over-rated player. Not to say he wasn't an ATG, but he wasn't head or shoulders above other ATGs in anything except longevity.

If Harbhajan played 300 Tests he'd have more wickets than Murali and Warne combined...what exactly does that prove?

 

[Sadevdesai]

To say that Tendulkar is over-rated .... only reflects on the writer .... and nothing else !!! Even the oppositions has praised him profusely .... so why believe this one guy, who may have an enormous dislike for the Indians !!!!!

 

[azimiqbal]

Ok this thread is deluded , I am neither bias towards kohli or tendulkar, but just by looking at stats does not tell the whole story.

1)Why don’t we talk about the state of the pitches ? They are flatter now then they have ever been.

2) 2 new balls from each end , pretty much kill any chance of reverse swing.

3) boundaries are smaller cause now then they have ever been.

4) extra fielders in the circle after the power plays makes it easier to hit boundaries, hence lack of build up of pressure and batsman do not need to take a chance.

5) the quality and the size of the bats have gotten bigger and better.



Overall we should not compare tendulkar and kohli just appraiciate both of them.

But just annoys me when people use stats and do not actually take other important factors into consideration.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Ok this thread is deluded , I am neither bias towards kohli or tendulkar, but just by looking at stats does not tell the whole story.

1)Why don’t we talk about the state of the pitches ? They are flatter now then they have ever been.

2) 2 new balls from each end , pretty much kill any chance of reverse swing.

3) boundaries are smaller cause now then they have ever been.

4) extra fielders in the circle after the power plays makes it easier to hit boundaries, hence lack of build up of pressure and batsman do not need to take a chance.

5) the quality and the size of the bats have gotten bigger and better.



Overall we should not compare tendulkar and kohli just appraiciate both of them.

But just annoys me when people use stats and do not actually take other important factors into consideration.

Actually their career overlapped and both of them did equally well. One on his last legs. Other one was getting his feet wet. Tendulkar generated interest so much that India has been producing so many top notch batsmen for the last decade or so.

 

[RainMan_]

Tendulkar in general is an over-rated player. Not to say he wasn't an ATG, but he wasn't head or shoulders above other ATGs in anything except longevity.

If Harbhajan played 300 Tests he'd have more wickets than Murali and Warne combined...what exactly does that prove?

Wrong. A player doesn't have to be head and shoulders above everyone to be considered as the greatest of all time. Remaining at the top of your game and performing consistently over a prolonged period of time is one of the most important things that a player can do in cricket.


Ur example of harnhajan is quite irrelevant since it doesn't have any factual basis. Harnhajan was quite good in the early part of his career. If he indeed managed to maintain his form for 15/20 years and ended with 700/800 test wickets then he also would've been called an atg. But he couldn't because barring sachin only very few players in the history of cricket have that unique ability who managed to remain at the top of their game for such a long time.


U can very well understand the importance of it by looking at our very own fizz. He started with a bang and was averaging 12 or something with the ball in first couple of years of his career. But since he's another useless trundler from Bangladesh and doesn't have any natural ability, he couldn't sustain it. What's his bowling average now. Perhaps somewhere around 28/30? If he plays for another couple of years it'll touch 40. See how difficult it is to maintain form just for 2 years whereas sachin has maintained it for over 25 years.

No wonder he's widely considered as the greatest batsman to ever play the game of cricket.

 

[EliteCynical]

One thing the OP has conveniently forgotten is the record Sachin had in neutral venues like Sharjah, Toronto, Singapore against some of the best bowling attacks in the world. These places would not be classified as home of the opposition, they would certainly be neutral venues away from home for Sachin!

 

[EliteCynical]

These are the 30 Best Ever ODI Ratings for bowlers in ICC tournaments. Please check and see how many Sachin has faced and how many has Kohli faced.

p.s. Have bolded the bowlers Sachin has faced and italicized the ones Kohli has faced. Rest my case.

1 940 J. Garner WI 940 v New Zealand, 17/04/1985
2 923 R.J. Hadlee NZ 923 v Sri Lanka, 18/06/1983
3 917 S.M. Pollock SA 917 v Pakistan, 14/02/2007
4 913 M. Muralidaran SL 913 v New Zealand, 09/04/2002
5 903 G.D. McGrath AUS 903 v South Africa, 30/03/2002
6 892 E.J. Chatfield NZ 892 v Sri Lanka, 04/11/1984
7 891 M.D. Marshall WI 891 v Australia, 27/01/1985
7 891 D.K. Lillee AUS 891 v New Zealand, 20/02/1982
9 877 C.E.L. Ambrose WI 877 v England, 25/05/1991
10 875 M.A. Holding WI 875 v Pakistan, 02/12/1985
11 867 R.G.D. Willis ENG 867 v Sri Lanka, 20/06/1983
12 862 W.P.U.J.C. Vaas SL 862 v South Africa, 20/08/2004
13 852 B. Lee AUS 852 v South Africa, 03/02/2006
14 851 Wasim Akram PAK 851 v South Africa, 16/10/1994
14 851 Maninder Singh IND 851 v West Indies, 02/01/1988
16 848 A.M.E. Roberts WI 848 v India, 13/10/1983
17 845 Kapil Dev IND 845 v New Zealand, 10/04/1986
18 841 G.F. Lawson AUS 841 v West Indies, 14/03/1984
19 823 J.N. Gillespie AUS 823 v Pakistan, 04/09/2004
20 814 P.R. Reiffel AUS 814 v West Indies, 01/01/1996
21 810 Saeed Ajmal PAK 810 v South Africa, 15/03/2013
22 809 S.E. Bond NZ 809 v South Africa, 14/04/2007
23 808 C.J. McDermott AUS 808 v South Africa, 14/12/1993
24 805 Saqlain Mushtaq PAK 805 v West Indies, 14/01/1997
24 805 N.W. Bracken AUS 805 v Sri Lanka, 16/04/2007
26 801 C.A. Walsh WI 801 v India, 16/10/1989
27 800 R.M. Hogg AUS 800 v Pakistan, 25/01/1984
28 798 A. Kumble IND 798 v South Africa, 06/11/1996
29 794 A.A. Donald SA 794 v Australia, 23/01/1998
30 791 S.P. Narine WI 791 v Sri Lanka, 28/06/2013

 

[OneTip-OneHand]

Does this myth even exist? Especially among Indian fans. I have rarely come across any discussion of Tendulkar vs Kohli apart from PP ofcourse.

Its the PakPassion where its an established fact by our Pakistani friends (most of them) that Tendulkar is over rated and Kohli is already miles ahead of him.

So this thread serves only one purpose- try to create a cat fight among Indians.

I also found it hilarious that OP took the pain of calculating (wasting hours/minutes) and pasting those stats which is kind of meaningless

 

[TM Riddle]

Tendulkar in general is an over-rated player. Not to say he wasn't an ATG, but he wasn't head or shoulders above other ATGs in anything except longevity.

If Harbhajan played 300 Tests he'd have more wickets than Murali and Warne combined...what exactly does that prove?

Why would any team allow Harbhajan to play 300 tests if he wasn't performing consistently?

 

[CricketAnalyst]

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.

Both batsmen and bowlers now are miles ahead of where they were in the past.

Back then conditions were more favourable to bowling so bowlers did better.

Tom Curran barely get into the England side. With a ball that's barely 20 overs old he was reversing it so much at pace that he derailed an easy chase with only 4-5 overs left. Trust me, put him in 90s with 40 over old balls, and this guy who can't even get into England team would dismantle most batting line-ups.

There are now words for how much better cricket is nowadays but people are very reluctant to realize these facts.

 

[The_Odd_One]

There is a huge differences in the bowling quality and pitch conditions. I don't know how can anyone deny that.