Can Virat Kohli match or surpass Imran Khan as a leader?

[urnotserious]

Australia could've been asked to follow on twice, and the series would've been 3-1 if not for rain. How did India not dominate?

This is an emotion thread and not a logical one. Which is why Imran being a run of the mill alright captain with only 14 wins is considered better than someone like Kohli who has 26 wins.

Imran wouldn't even be the 4th best Indian captain by wins.

 

[urnotserious]

Australia could've been asked to follow on twice, and the series would've been 3-1 if not for rain. How did India not dominate?

This is an emotion thread and not a logical one. Which is why Imran being a run of the mill alright captain with only 14 wins is considered better than someone like Kohli who has 26 wins.

Imran wouldn't even be the 4th best Indian captain by wins.

 

[aukhan]

He will for sure.

Kohli is already a far superior player than Imran and as Captain Imran is overrated plus he used to cheat which hampers his claim to be the greatest thing ever. Imran has cult followers, he is like a prophet for them so they will never admit his shortcomings. If Kohli manages to win the 50 over world cup in his career than he will easily be considered a better Captain than Imran.

 

[Abdul]

Kohli is already hundred times the captain Imran ever was.

 

[Vegitto1]

Imran Khan
Imran Khan’s boot laces
*X number of light years*
Saurav Ganguly
Dhoni
*Daylight*

And good night.

 

[Canford Cliffs]

Never watched Imran Khan play...so wont be able to comment how good he was aside stats. We sometimes romanticize with yesteryear players devaluing the current generation. When Kohli took over the captaincy, Indian test team was rank 7 (below NZ, SL and Pak). Within 4 years, not only he took the team to undisputed no.1 but also won test series in Aust, WI SL etc. Also statistically, Kohli's record is better than Imran as a skipper.

So except the emotional angle, nothing cab justify how IK was better than Kohli.

 

[Arham_PakFan]

Australia could've been asked to follow on twice, and the series would've been 3-1 if not for rain. How did India not dominate?

I meant dominate the recent series abroad other than in Australia.

 

[Arham_PakFan]

Dominate? Did they? Is that why they have 26 draws and 36 wins whereas Kohli has 26 wins and 10 draws?

I dont think the word dominate means what you think it means. LOL.

I was talking about series. How many series has Kohli won in SENA countries?

Also, draws were a lot more common then. Since you're such a big fan of stats,check the % of draws in the 1970's-1980's with the 2010's

 

[urnotserious]

I was talking about series. How many series has Kohli won in SENA countries?

Also, draws were a lot more common then. Since you're such a big fan of stats,check the % of draws in the 1970's-1980's with the 2010's

Kohli has more wins in away series than Imran ever did.

Kohli has more series wins at halfway point than Clive Lloyd and his team did at a similar juncture.

Kohli's teams are more dominant at home than Lloyd's teams at home.

Oh and fewer draws. By any metric he is far superior to Imran Khan and his meager 14 wins.

At 14 wins, in most cricketing nations we call him an interim or a stop gap captain. Imran Khan does not belong in this conversation, its an insult to Kohli, Waugh, Ponting, Lloyd and others.

He was even worse in ODIs. At 53% winning percentage he was barely average. Just barely.

 

[Abdullah719]

Kohli has more wins in away series than Imran ever did.

Kohli has more series wins at halfway point than Clive Lloyd and his team did at a similar juncture.

Kohli's teams are more dominant at home than Lloyd's teams at home.

Oh and fewer draws. By any metric he is far superior to Imran Khan and his meager 14 wins.

At 14 wins, in most cricketing nations we call him an interim or a stop gap captain. Imran Khan does not belong in this conversation, its an insult to Kohli, Waugh, Ponting, Lloyd and others.

He was even worse in ODIs. At 53% winning percentage he was barely average. Just barely.

Going by this logic, we can even call Misbah-ul-Haq twice the captain IK was.

Your linear comparison makes no distinction between eras and the context of how Test cricket was played, and relative strength of teams.

If this is how it's done, everyone can look up the stats and see who won the most matches and we'll know who the best captain is/was.

Smith > Ponting > Waugh > Lloyd > Border... Right.

 

[Etherealistic]

Virat Kohli had already surpassed Imran Khan. What did Imran do as captain overseas? Just drew a series. Winning a series is greater than drawing a series which even Ganguly did in 2003 against Australia and Rahul David did in 2007 in England. Imran Khan is overrated, he just had great bowlers which made him look good as a captain. Virat doesn't have great bowlers but instilled a great deal of confidence in his fast bowlers and batsmen by leading from the front. The greatness of a captain is measured by how he made an ordinary team into an extra ordinary team and here Virat is the better. Imran isn't a standard for captaincy at all.

 

[urnotserious]

Going by this logic, we can even call Misbah-ul-Haq twice the captain IK was.

Your linear comparison makes no distinction between eras and the context of how Test cricket was played, and relative strength of teams.

If this is how it's done, everyone can look up the stats and see who won the most matches and we'll know who the best captain is/was.

Smith > Ponting > Waugh > Lloyd > Border... Right.

Bowling attacks, who had a better attack Kohli or Imran? You either had great fast bowlers or you didnt, which one is it?

Batting, who had a better lineup Kohli or Imran? You either had legends like Miandad, Haq, Zaheer Abbas or you didn't, which one is it?

What you do is look at how he walked around the field with his swag screaming at his team and that makes him a better captain. It doesn't. He was a captain of Pakistan for 10 years, where he won a grand total of 14 matches. 14!!!! 1.4/year! And this is despite Imran enjoying a better bowling line up by a wide margin, comparable batting line up.

At the end of the day, results matter. Winning a match and a half per year is a fireable offense, not GOAT category. LOL. He was a below average captain at best and to compare him to Kohli or anyone with any success for that matter is not looking at it from a "cricketing viewpoint" but rather through homer goggles.

And Smith? Who are you referring to in your post? Steve Smith, one who has won 18 games and lost 10? He is nowhere near the other names you mentioned. Also Kohli fits in somewhere between Waugh, Lloyd and Border.

Still, no Imran though. At least not for another thirty names.

 

[urnotserious]

Going by this logic, we can even call Misbah-ul-Haq twice the captain IK was.

Your linear comparison makes no distinction between eras and the context of how Test cricket was played, and relative strength of teams.

If this is how it's done, everyone can look up the stats and see who won the most matches and we'll know who the best captain is/was.

Smith > Ponting > Waugh > Lloyd > Border... Right.

Also Misbah isn't better than Imran because he won 26 games to Imran's 14 but also lost 19 to Imran's 8.

He is a below average captain, above average batsman, but an average cricketer overall.

And its, Ponting > Waugh > Clarke > Lloyd > Richards > Kohli......................light years worth of distance.................Ganguly > few thousand miles > Imran.

 

[urnotserious]

I meant dominate the recent series abroad other than in Australia.

You mean like Sri Lanka where India won 3-0? No but India can't get credit for that because they are home like conditions, however West Indies gets credit for dominating Australia in the 80s despite it being home like conditions.

Get rid of your colonial mindset.

 

[urnotserious]

Imran Khan
Imran Khan’s boot laces
*X number of light years*
Saurav Ganguly
Dhoni
*Daylight*

And good night.

LOL, Imran has a record to be a stopgap captain for most countries nowadays. Barely. 1.4 match wins per year. Yeah sounds like GOAT material right there!!!

 

[jadaja]

I would rate Javed tactically higher than Imran. Kohli in tests is so far better than Imran, it is not even close.

 

[urnotserious]

I would rate Javed tactically higher than Imran. Kohli in tests is so far better than Imran, it is not even close.

Exactly! Even with all of your "tactics" and "team selection" if all you can win is 1.4 matches a year how good of a tactician are you?

Hint: Not very good. Bad, really really bad.

 

[Birdman]

The Question is can Kohli Surpass Imran Khan as captain?
What is the superiority of captaincy measured against? To see who is a great captain you have to bring some kind of quantifiable data to the table, it may be number of test wins, number of series wins, number of world cup wins or performances that helped his team win games or series.

Also you are comparing a player who is current against a retired player. Imran cannot achieve anymore in cricket whereas Kohli still has about 10 more years left in his career. So who knows he may go on and do great things or he may decline.
Most of the posters have never seen Imran play, they are going by youtube clips and stories of legendary achievements from third party.

 

[jadaja]

Imran Khan gets credit as captain because he could unite all players and eliminate all fighting factions.
That particular problem is mainly present in Pakistan, it is not so prevalent in other countries.

He almost cost Pakistan world cup with his stubborn batting in 1992 world cup finals.He got bailed out by Wasim Akram.

 

[SportsWarrior]

You mean like Sri Lanka where India won 3-0? No but India can't get credit for that because they are home like conditions, however West Indies gets credit for dominating Australia in the 80s despite it being home like conditions.

Get rid of your colonial mindset.

And Aus/eng get credit for succeeding in each other home. Pak gets credit for winning in England where as most of their legends played more County than pak domestics thereby had more experience . Viv gets credit for succeeding in England and Australia ignoring the fact that he played year after year county and shield cricket in Australia.

 

[Abdullah719]

Bowling attacks, who had a better attack Kohli or Imran? You either had great fast bowlers or you didnt, which one is it?

Batting, who had a better lineup Kohli or Imran? You either had legends like Miandad, Haq, Zaheer Abbas or you didn't, which one is it?

What you do is look at how he walked around the field with his swag screaming at his team and that makes him a better captain. It doesn't. He was a captain of Pakistan for 10 years, where he won a grand total of 14 matches. 14!!!! 1.4/year! And this is despite Imran enjoying a better bowling line up by a wide margin, comparable batting line up.

Can you present the facts and numbers that show how great Pakistan's lineup was during IK's tenure?

Zaheer Abbas retired by 1984, two years into his tenure. Waqar Younis debuted in 1989, two years before the end of IK's tenure.

And Smith? Who are you referring to in your post? Steve Smith, one who has won 18 games and lost 10? He is nowhere near the other names you mentioned. Also Kohli fits in somewhere between Waugh, Lloyd and Border.

Still, no Imran though. At least not for another thirty names.

Graeme Smith, the captain with the most wins in Tests.

So Kohli, a captain regularly berated by Indian posters on this forum is at the level of Waugh, Lloyd and Border. OK.

At the end of the day, results matter. Winning a match and a half per year is a fireable offense, not GOAT category. LOL. He was a below average captain at best and to compare him to Kohli or anyone with any success for that matter is not looking at it from a "cricketing viewpoint" but rather through homer goggles.

If you want to have a proper discussion, I would recommend a fact-based discussion with proper points rather than buzz words.

 

[SportsWarrior]

Exactly! Even with all of your "tactics" and "team selection" if all you can win is 1.4 matches a year how good of a tactician are you?

Hint: Not very good. Bad, really really bad.

And literally getting whoever he wanted in his team playing professional cricket in counties (best professional setup that time), having legendary fast bowlers, access to bottle caps (he himself admitted it so don't moderate), better batting, so low success rate is just average.

 

[Muhammad10]

LOL, Imran has a record to be a stopgap captain for most countries nowadays. Barely. 1.4 match wins per year. Yeah sounds like GOAT material right there!!!

Using urnotserious lolgic, Kapil is barely good enough to be a captain in gully cricket with his 4 wins in 34 Test matches. )

Note: That is not my view. I am just exposing your hilarious lack of cricketing acumen.

 

[SportsWarrior]

Imran Khan gets credit as captain because he could unite all players and eliminate all fighting factions.
That particular problem is mainly present in Pakistan, it is not so prevalent in other countries.

He almost cost Pakistan world cup with his stubborn batting in 1992 world cup finals.He got bailed out by Wasim Akram.

And in semi finals by inzy and in league stages by rain gods.

 

[urnotserious]

Can you present the facts and numbers that show how great Pakistan's lineup was during IK's tenure?

Zaheer Abbas retired by 1984, two years into his tenure. Waqar Younis debuted in 1989, two years before the end of IK's tenure.



Graeme Smith, the captain with the most wins in Tests.

So Kohli, a captain regularly berated by Indian posters on this forum is at the level of Waugh, Lloyd and Border. OK.



If you want to have a proper discussion, I would recommend a fact-based discussion with proper points rather than buzz words.

I gave you 14 wins in ten years as a reason enough to not consider him to be GOAT.

Why dont YOU give me a reason as to why despite that terrible performance as a captain you think he deserves to be in that conversation. Let's have a mature conversation then.

 

[SportsWarrior]

Can you present the facts and numbers that show how great Pakistan's lineup was during IK's tenure?

Zaheer Abbas retired by 1984, two years into his tenure. Waqar Younis debuted in 1989, two years before the end of IK's tenure.



Graeme Smith, the captain with the most wins in Tests.

So Kohli, a captain regularly berated by Indian posters on this forum is at the level of Waugh, Lloyd and Border. OK.



If you want to have a proper discussion, I would recommend a fact-based discussion with proper points rather than buzz words.

Waugh and ponting also had great teams. Kohli I feel is impatient and not the best of tactician. But he obviously makes up with other qualities as the same bowling team as.perfomed better under him than any other captains.

 

[urnotserious]

Using urnotserious lolgic, Kapil is barely good enough to be a captain in gully cricket with his 4 wins in 34 Test matches. )

Note: That is not my view. I am just exposing your hilarious lack of cricketing acumen.

He surely wouldn't belong in my GOAT captain's lists. Much like Imran wouldn't.

LOL.

 

[SportsWarrior]

Can you present the facts and numbers that show how great Pakistan's lineup was during IK's tenure?

Zaheer Abbas retired by 1984, two years into his tenure. Waqar Younis debuted in 1989, two years before the end of IK's tenure.



Graeme Smith, the captain with the most wins in Tests.

So Kohli, a captain regularly berated by Indian posters on this forum is at the level of Waugh, Lloyd and Border. OK.



If you want to have a proper discussion, I would recommend a fact-based discussion with proper points rather than buzz words.

Actually you need to back up with numbers. [MENTION=141144]urnotserious[/MENTION] is already quoting numbers

 

[Muhammad10]

He surely wouldn't belong in my GOAT captain's lists. Much like Imran wouldn't.

LOL.

Don't shift the goalposts now. You clearly said his record makes him a stopgap level captain. Now that you have seen Kapil's massively inferior record from the same era, tell me how you can call Dev anything but a shockingly awful and overrated captain, based on your previous assessment of Imran.

Another disclaimer: The above view is not mine but should be urnotserious' view based on analogical deduction. If he denies it, he ends up exposing his disingenuous agenda and embarrassingly blatant double standards... )

 

[Abdullah719]

I gave you 14 wins in ten years as a reason enough to not consider him to be GOAT.

Why dont YOU give me a reason as to why despite that terrible performance as a captain you think he deserves to be in that conversation. Let's have a mature conversation then.

Test are much more result orientated nowadays.

During IK's tenure, 44% of Test matches were drawn.

Since Kohli began his tenure, just 16% of Test matches have been drawn.

IK never lost a series by more than a one-game margin. Kohli just lost a series 4-1 a few months ago.

 

[Muhammad10]

Actually you need to back up with numbers. [MENTION=141144]urnotserious[/MENTION] is already quoting numbers ��

You both seem big on numbers. Do share your opinion of Kapil's captaincy based on numbers too... I believe he's quite highly rated by Indians. Since you're both so keen to use current statistics to analyse that era, I would be very interested in your thoughts, provided you don't suddenly start using logic in your analysis.

 

[Birdman]

You both seem big on numbers. Do share your opinion of Kapil's captaincy based on numbers too... I believe he's quite highly rated by Indians. Since you're both so keen to use current statistics to analyse that era, I would be very interested in your thoughts, provided you don't suddenly start using logic in your analysis.

I don't think Indians see Kapil as a great leader. He was one of the best cricketers in India in the 80's and 90's.

 

[Arham_PakFan]

You mean like Sri Lanka where India won 3-0? No but India can't get credit for that because they are home like conditions, however West Indies gets credit for dominating Australia in the 80s despite it being home like conditions.

Get rid of your colonial mindset.

Okay. Sri Lanka is one country. Australia is another. How many series has Kohli won elsewhere? Sri Lanka and West Indies are poor test teams. It is not exactly an achievement winning there. Even Misbah's team won in WI. Even a poor touring side like England won in SL.

What colonial mindset? How did you come up to that ridiculous conclusion?

 

[Hitman]

Okay. Sri Lanka is one country. Australia is another. How many series has Kohli won elsewhere? Sri Lanka and West Indies are poor test teams. It is not exactly an achievement winning there. Even Misbah's team won in WI. Even a poor touring side like England won in SL.

What colonial mindset? How did you come up to that ridiculous conclusion?

Come on, how long has Kolhi been the captain? Imran was the captain of his team for 10 years.

 

[Arham_PakFan]

Del

 

[Arham_PakFan]

Come on, how long has Kolhi been the captain? Imran was the captain of his team for 10 years.

I know. That's not my argument though.

My argument is the poster claiming that this Indian team is the Windies of the 80's.

 

[Hitman]

You both seem big on numbers. Do share your opinion of Kapil's captaincy based on numbers too... I believe he's quite highly rated by Indians. Since you're both so keen to use current statistics to analyse that era, I would be very interested in your thoughts, provided you don't suddenly start using logic in your analysis.

I don't think my fellow Indian rate him for being a great captain. He is fondly remembered for the 83' WC win as the captain of the team. But when it comes to Indian captains, I don't think many Indian put him in the same pedestal as Pataudi, Ganguly or Dhoni.

 

[Hitman]

I know. That's not my argument though.

My argument is the poster claiming that this Indian team is the Windies of the 80's.

Of course it not

I doubt whether we'll ever see a team dominate like the West Indies of the 80's or the Aussies of the 2000.

 

[Arham_PakFan]

Of course it not

I doubt whether we'll ever see a team dominate like the West Indies of the 80's or the Aussies of the 2000.

Exactly. I have nothing against this Indian team. They are probably the best team in the world atm and deserved No.1. New Zealand and England are the only other good test teams atm.

But to compare them to the GOAT teams like WI is a big exaggeration.

 

[Hitman]

Exactly. I have nothing against this Indian team. They are probably the best team in the world atm and deserved No.1. New Zealand and England are the only other good test teams atm.

But to compare them to the GOAT teams like WI is a big exaggeration.

We have emotional fans across both the sides of the border. Being the #1 ranked team at any point doesn't mean that team is as good as those two teams I mentioned. Those two teams will forever be remembered as the two greatest teams in the history of the game.

 

[jadaja]

Exactly. I have nothing against this Indian team. They are probably the best team in the world atm and deserved No.1. New Zealand and England are the only other good test teams atm.

But to compare them to the GOAT teams like WI is a big exaggeration.

Whoever compared this Indian to Goat Australian or WI teams need to have their head examnined.This team is not a great team by any stretch. It has so many holes but it is very young and Kohli is also very young captain, they aredoing right things, people who point out 4-1 England loss should have seen that series so so close inspite of losing all the tosses and no luck at all they ran England very close.

 

[urnotserious]

Test are much more result orientated nowadays.

During IK's tenure, 44% of Test matches were drawn.

Since Kohli began his tenure, just 16% of Test matches have been drawn.

IK never lost a series by more than a one-game margin. Kohli just lost a series 4-1 a few months ago.

Arguably you can say that he never played to win. Always defensive which is why he didn't win many matches. Even at home.

Imran away record(Aus, Eng, NZ, WI):

18 tests 3 wins 5 losses

Virat away record(SENAW)

18 tests 6 wins 8 losses

Imran home record

22 tests (ONLY)9 wins 2 losses


Virat home record

21 tests 15 wins 1 loss

Imran never won in Australia, Virat has. Virat is virtually unbeatable at home while also beating the other teams and not drawing those tests.

How is this even a contest I will never understand.

 

[urnotserious]

Whoever compared this Indian to Goat Australian or WI teams need to have their head examnined.This team is not a great team by any stretch. It has so many holes but it is very young and Kohli is also very young captain, they aredoing right things, people who point out 4-1 England loss should have seen that series so so close inspite of losing all the tosses and no luck at all they ran England very close.

So did that great team of WI. They lost to Australia 1-5 and lost in India 2-0.

Why is India the only one getting penalized for losing to England 1-4 when it seems to be universally accepted that Lloyd's team was the best ever despite the above mentioned stats.

 

[urnotserious]

Of course it not

I doubt whether we'll ever see a team dominate like the West Indies of the 80's or the Aussies of the 2000.

You mean the same team with Lloyed, Greenidge, Viv Richards, Holding, Kallicharan etc that lost to Australia in 75-76, 1-5? That domination? LOL

Or their series loss to India in India? That domination?

Do you guys even know the history before regurgitating fallacies such as those great WI teams?

Part of them getting credit is white guilt, we have no reason to offer them that. We shouldn't.

 

[Hitman]

You mean the same team with Lloyed, Greenidge, Viv Richards, Holding, Kallicharan etc that lost to Australia in 75-76, 1-5? That domination? LOL

Or their series loss to India in India? That domination?

Do you guys even know the history before regurgitating fallacies such as those great WI teams?

Part of them getting credit is white guilt, we have no reason to offer them that. We shouldn't.

Do you even know when the period of West Indies's domination exactly started? It was around 76', exactly by the time when they were humiliated in Australia. That loss was so devastaing for them, Viv Richards visited a shrine after that loss.

Your post would be equivalent to a new fan bringing up Australia loss in India in 2001 and their loss against England in the Ashes 2005 and then laughing off their period of domination. Little would they know that knowledgeable fans would be laughing off at them.

As for your series in India, they lost the 6 Test series 0-1. Do you want to have a look at the team they fielded? Here, have a look -

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/series/60477.html

 

[Muhammad10]

So did that great team of WI. They lost to Australia 1-5 and lost in India 2-0.

Why is India the only one getting penalized for losing to England 1-4 when it seems to be universally accepted that Lloyd's team was the best ever despite the above mentioned stats.

Can you at least be clear about what your point is? Previously you said you were comparing India's ODI team to the old Windies and now it's the Test team. Is it both?

 

[urnotserious]

Do you even know when the period of West Indies's domination exactly started? It was around 76', exactly by the time when they were humiliated in Australia. That loss was so devastaing for them, Viv Richards visited a shrine after that loss.

Your post would be equivalent to a new fan bringing up Australia loss in India in 2001 and their loss against England in the Ashes 2005 and then laughing off their period of domination. Little would they know that knowledgeable fans would be laughing off at them.

As for your series in India, they lost the 6 Test series 0-1. Do you want to have a look at the team they fielded? Here, have a look -

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/series/60477.html

So I guess we disregard losses that occurred? Can India do that too? Start fresh post England loss?

Also they lost to India in India while their "domination" was going on. Are you going to address that?

 

[Hitman]

Do you even know when the period of West Indies's domination exactly started? It was around 76', exactly by the time when they were humiliated in Australia. That loss was so devastaing for them, Viv Richards visited a shrine after that loss.

Your post would be equivalent to a new fan bringing up Australia loss in India in 2001 and their loss against England in the Ashes 2005 and then laughing off their period of domination. Little would they know that knowledgeable fans would be laughing off at them.

As for your series in India, they lost the 6 Test series 0-1. Do you want to have a look at the team they fielded? Here, have a look -

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/series/60477.html

That series against India in December, 1978 was when most of the regular West Indian players were busy playing the Kerry Packer circus.

 

[urnotserious]

That series against India in December, 1978 was when most of the regular West Indian players were busy playing the Kerry Packer circus.

India doesnt get the benefit of the doubt when Aus beat India without Sachin and Ganguly, why would WI?

 

[Hitman]

So I guess we disregard losses that occurred? Can India do that too? Start fresh post England loss?

Also they lost to India in India while their "domination" was going on. Are you going to address that?

You can count that series loss win of theirs in Australia, but please don't regard that loss as a one that came during their domination.

As for their 0-1 series loss in India, almost all of their regular players were busy playing in the Kerry Packer circus. It was the West Indies Z team. Have you ever wondered why almost no one talks of that series victory, while our series victory in West Indies back in 1971 is still celebrated till this day? There is a big reason for that.

Here, have a look at their team during that tour -

http://www.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/series/60477.html

 

[Abdullah719]

So did that great team of WI. They lost to Australia 1-5 and lost in India 2-0.

Why is India the only one getting penalized for losing to England 1-4 when it seems to be universally accepted that Lloyd's team was the best ever despite the above mentioned stats.

The team that Clive Lloyd built ended up going unbeaten for 15 years. If India manage anything close to that, then this discussion is viable.

 

[Hitman]

India doesnt get the benefit of the doubt when Aus beat India without Sachin and Ganguly, why would WI?

Because almost the every one of the entire West Indian regular players were not playing in that series. While in our case that you mentioned, only Sachin was missing for the first 2 Tests, and Ganguly when he opted out for the Nagpur Test.

 

[Abdullah719]

Arguably you can say that he never played to win. Always defensive which is why he didn't win many matches. Even at home.

Imran away record(Aus, Eng, NZ, WI):

18 tests 3 wins 5 losses

Virat away record(SENAW)

18 tests 6 wins 8 losses

Imran home record

22 tests (ONLY)9 wins 2 losses


Virat home record

21 tests 15 wins 1 loss

You have not refuted my point. IK drew a lot of games because that was the nature of Test cricket in those days. 44% vs 16%, that's almost 3x more draws in IK's era. So naturally he won fewer games. Plus, the team is generally considered to have achieved at a very high level, above expectations. The team was quite dependant on Wasim and Miandad often. IK and Wasim formed an excellent bowling attack but there were always weaknesses after that.

Imran never won in Australia, Virat has. Virat is virtually unbeatable at home while also beating the other teams and not drawing those tests.

How is this even a contest I will never understand.

Come on. Allan Border, Greg Chappell, Mark Taylor, Dean Jones, Steve Waugh, Dennis Lillee etc. Which of the current Australian cricketers (specially batsmen) is in the same league? Australia's current bowling attack is quite good but the batting is a trainwreck.

 

[Bewal Express]

You have some guys without any knowledge of the game reading statistics without context. This Ind team is a good team but some of the claims for a team that got smashed 4-1 to an average English team shows how delusional people are.

 

[AMSS]

You have not refuted my point. IK drew a lot of games because that was the nature of Test cricket in those days. 44% vs 16%, that's almost 3x more draws in IK's era. So naturally he won fewer games. Plus, the team is generally considered to have achieved at a very high level, above expectations. The team was quite dependant on Wasim and Miandad often. IK and Wasim formed an excellent bowling attack but there were always weaknesses after that.

I am going to take your point about the nature of tests being defensive back in the day in good faith. Yes, it's true that teams were not attacking and it was not easy to force a result.

But that means Imran was NOT a captain who broke the existing mould in which cricket was played. If that's true, then why's Imran held up by Pak fans as some iconoclast captain who cannot be matched? Why do you think Virat cannot be favorably compared to him?

 

[Bewal Express]

You have not refuted my point. IK drew a lot of games because that was the nature of Test cricket in those days. 44% vs 16%, that's almost 3x more draws in IK's era. So naturally he won fewer games. Plus, the team is generally considered to have achieved at a very high level, above expectations. The team was quite dependant on Wasim and Miandad often. IK and Wasim formed an excellent bowling attack but there were always weaknesses after that.



Come on. Allan Border, Greg Chappell, Mark Taylor, Dean Jones, Steve Waugh, Dennis Lillee etc. Which of the current Australian cricketers (specially batsmen) is in the same league? Australia's current bowling attack is quite good but the batting is a trainwreck.

Arguing with people with as little knowledge as some on here is a waste of time.

 

[AMSS]

You have some guys without any knowledge of the game reading statistics without context. This Ind team is a good team but some of the claims for a team that got smashed 4-1 to an average English team shows how delusional people are.

Conversely, Imran struggled to draw a series against a weak, Gavaskar-less India in 1989 when he had Waqar, Wasim, Qadir and himself forming a formidable bowling attack. That too while playing in Pakistan!. Looks like Imran wasn't all that.

 

[Hitman]

You have some guys without any knowledge of the game reading statistics without context. This Ind team is a good team but some of the claims for a team that got smashed 4-1 to an average English team shows how delusional people are.

There are two sides of this -

1) Indian fans getting annoyed when some Pak fans make fun of this team. Let's face it, it's not fair. India is clearly the best team at the moment. So obviously Indian fans gets riled up when some Pak fans refuse to give this team it's due, keeping in mind Pakistan is the #7th ranked team currently.

2. Pak fans getting annoyed at some delusional Indian fans who claim this team is as good as the all dominating West Indian team of the 80's or the Aussie team of the 2000. It's then when Pak fans feel the need to give a reality check to those delusional fans.

 

[Birdman]

There are two sides of this -

1) Indian fans getting annoyed when some Pak fans make fun of this team. Let's face it, it's not fair. India is clearly the best team at the moment. So obviously Indian fans gets riled up when some Pak fans refuse to give this team it's due, keeping in mind Pakistan is the #7th ranked team currently.

2. Pak fans getting annoyed at some delusional Indian fans who claim this team is as good as the all dominating West Indian team of the 80's or the Aussie team of the 2000. It's then when Pak fans feel the need to give a reality check to those delusional fans.

People have to be extremely deluded to think that this team is comparable to WI of the 80's. India don't even have a proper open pair and this team is not settled. WI had Haynes and Greenedge who can bat the whole day.
Indians are using performance on the field as a measure and Pakistanis are using the dressing room performance as a measure.

 

[Bewal Express]

There are two sides of this -

1) Indian fans getting annoyed when some Pak fans make fun of this team. Let's face it, it's not fair. India is clearly the best team at the moment. So obviously Indian fans gets riled up when some Pak fans refuse to give this team it's due, keeping in mind Pakistan is the #7th ranked team currently.

2. Pak fans getting annoyed at some delusional Indian fans who claim this team is as good as the all dominating West Indian team of the 80's or the Aussie team of the 2000. It's then when Pak fans feel the need to give a reality check to those delusional fans.

Whether PK fans like it or not, this Ind team is a good team and has the talent to be remembered for years to come. But some of these guys that come on here think that stats tell us everything​ but in reality without context they are meaningless

 

[Abdullah719]

I am going to take your point about the nature of tests being defensive back in the day in good faith. Yes, it's true that teams were not attacking and it was not easy to force a result.

But that means Imran was NOT a captain who broke the existing mould in which cricket was played. If that's true, then why's Imran held up by Pak fans as some iconoclast captain who cannot be matched? Why do you think Virat cannot be favorably compared to him?

IK was not a revolutionary captain in terms of what he did, compared to the rest. But he was revolutionary for Pakistan. He wasn't a supernatural figure or anything, there are many great captains who were as good as, some arguably better than him. But Kohli? The guy whom half the Indians don't seem to rate?

I don't follow Indian cricket extremely closely so I'll keep my comments generic. Kohli is obviously doing something right to have the record he has so far as a Test captain, but he does seem to be making some mistakes with selection and I've seen him getting criticised for his on-field conduct and tactics as well. I think he's benefiting a lot from the hard work BCCI have done over the past couple of decades which has resulted in India cricket being where it is today. The question is: If we replace Kohli the captain with someone else, would results drastically differ? I've seen many claim that India would do even better if someone like Rahane was at the helm. It's like Waugh vs Ponting. One was rated as a great captain, while the other was rated as a captain of a great team.

 

[Muhammad10]

Conversely, Imran struggled to draw a series against a weak, Gavaskar-less India in 1989 when he had Waqar, Wasim, Qadir and himself forming a formidable bowling attack. That too while playing in Pakistan!. Looks like Imran wasn't all that.

How can you compare a dull, drawn series played on roads to a comprehensive 4-1 series loss? There was no "struggle" involved in 1989; just two teams racking up big totals on flat pitches, as seen in the stats for the series in question:

 

[ILcricket]

Kohli is not special as a skipper . How was IK tactically - i seen his record but you cannot understand his captaincy acumen from it .

 

[Buffet]

IK won a test against WI. Even if many gun players were missing it was still a praiseworthy effort. It resulted in a series draw.

At the same time, IK lost a test in SL which resulted in series score of 1-1 in 1986 under him.


So touting about scoreline is not going to say too much about captains either way. Scorelines are not just about captains.

IK was a great leader and dependent on Miandad for tactic. Kohli is also a great leader, but he has just started. He looks poor in team selection. Comparison will be fair when Kohli is done.

 

[Vegitto1]

How about this - You find me some neutral ex-players (not Indian or Pakistani) who can say that Kholi is better than Imran Khan and I will accept defeat on this subject.

Now, we can all agree that an ex-professional cricketer has more knowledge in his little pinky that you might have accumulated sitting at home watching cricket.

 

[Birdman]

How about this - You find me some neutral ex-players (not Indian or Pakistani) who can say that Kholi is better than Imran Khan and I will accept defeat on this subject.

Now, we can all agree that an ex-professional cricketer has more knowledge in his little pinky that you might have accumulated sitting at home watching cricket.

If I ask players from the 80's they'll say Imran is better but if I ask current crop they'll say Kohli is better.

 

[Hitman]

How about this - You find me some neutral ex-players (not Indian or Pakistani) who can say that Kholi is better than Imran Khan and I will accept defeat on this subject.

Now, we can all agree that an ex-professional cricketer has more knowledge in his little pinky that you might have accumulated sitting at home watching cricket.

Funny how lists compiled of greatest cricketers ever by ex cricketers gets thrown out of the window by a lot of posters here when almost every time Sachin is rated ahead of Imran?

Imran captained his team for 10 years. Kohli has so far captained the Test team for barely 4 years.

 

[jadaja]

So did that great team of WI. They lost to Australia 1-5 and lost in India 2-0.

Why is India the only one getting penalized for losing to England 1-4 when it seems to be universally accepted that Lloyd's team was the best ever despite the above mentioned stats.

Noone is penalizing Indian team for losing 1-4 to England. You can't be seriously comparing this Indian team to those teams who won over years away from home dominating all teams.

WI dominant run started after their 1-5 loss in Australia for next 15 years they only lost one series that too due to dodgy umpiring.

Aussies lost to India in 2001 but they won everwhere, when this Indian team does win more than one away series and also do it multiple times we can talk about greatness.

Rightnow it is very average team in terms of all time greatness.

 

[AMSS]

How can you compare a dull, drawn series played on roads to a comprehensive 4-1 series loss? There was no "struggle" involved in 1989; just two teams racking up big totals on flat pitches, as seen in the stats for the series in question:

View attachment 87037

View attachment 87038

View attachment 87039

View attachment 87040

So you are saying the supposedly all-conquering Imran with pace demons in Wasim and Waqar was helpless against a Gavaskar less India? Wow, what a leader, lmao!

Not a surprise Virat wipes the floor with him

 

[AMSS]

IK was not a revolutionary captain in terms of what he did, compared to the rest. But he was revolutionary for Pakistan. He wasn't a supernatural figure or anything, there are many great captains who were as good as, some arguably better than him. But Kohli? The guy whom half the Indians don't seem to rate?

I don't follow Indian cricket extremely closely so I'll keep my comments generic. Kohli is obviously doing something right to have the record he has so far as a Test captain, but he does seem to be making some mistakes with selection and I've seen him getting criticised for his on-field conduct and tactics as well. I think he's benefiting a lot from the hard work BCCI have done over the past couple of decades which has resulted in India cricket being where it is today. The question is: If we replace Kohli the captain with someone else, would results drastically differ? I've seen many claim that India would do even better if someone like Rahane was at the helm. It's like Waugh vs Ponting. One was rated as a great captain, while the other was rated as a captain of a great team.

Indians not rating Virat has nothing to do with Imran's achievements as captain vis-a-vis Virat. Indians don't rate Virat because they expect more from him while maybe the Pakistani fans were happy with whatever drawn series Imran could get against a depleted Windies?

Perhaps Imran's case was helped by lack of internet and cricket forums where captains are scrutinized by the session? Rahane could very well be a better captain than Virat but that doesn't diminish Virat's standing as a captain when compared against Imran. It only means Rahane would be better than both Virat and Imran.

Frankly, I had not realized Imran's record was so utterly bang average for someone who's worshiped as a deity. Virat is not just better, but literally a league above as a skipper.

 

[Muhammad10]

So you are saying the supposedly all-conquering Imran with pace demons in Wasim and Waqar was helpless against a Gavaskar less India? Wow, what a leader, lmao!

Not a surprise Virat wipes the floor with him

Took you long enough to come up with that comprehensive, logic-based rebuttal.

 

[AMSS]

Took you long enough to come up with that comprehensive, logic-based rebuttal.

Here's another logical rebuttal for your reading pleasure.

Imran, captain peerless, couldn't win a series against the mighty Lankans in 1986.

You can bank on me to keep feeding you facts in bite sized nuggets.

 

[Dead Ball]

Kohli's firsts as Indian captain now -

- First ever test series win in Australia.
- First ever ODI series win in South Africa.
- First ever ODI bilateral series win in Australia (India have won tri nation tournaments in Australia before though)

ODi series in NZ is gonna be a cracker...hope there was a test series as well...

 

[happydavy]

There are plenty of captains who have been better than Imran and Kohli, for eg: - Clive Lloyd, Graeme Smith, Steve Waugh - they have won a lot of abroad series and matches. While Kohli still has a chance to get there in the list of best captains ever, Imran doesn't. Imran's win record is just so ordinary that no amount of poetic description by his fans, can overcome the hard facts.

 

[Sin Nombre]

There are plenty of captains who have been better than Imran and Kohli, for eg: - Clive Lloyd, Graeme Smith, Steve Waugh - they have won a lot of abroad series and matches. While Kohli still has a chance to get there in the list of best captains ever, Imran doesn't. Imran's win record is just so ordinary that no amount of poetic description by his fans, can overcome the hard facts.

Kohli has a superior record to Smith as captaincy in both tests and ODIs. His winning percentages in both formats is amongst the best all-time.

Imran doesn't hold a candle to it. Like Kapil, his main legacy is winning the first WC for his country.

 

[Hasan123]

Imran Khan was a great captain. I have no doubt about that. But I don't see why people think Kohli can't surpass him as captain. India have been on top of the test ranking for a while and if he wins a WC, isn't that a great captain? Dominating in his era and India are playing young players who will represent India well after Kohli has gone.

I think if Imran was captain 5/10 years ago with his record ,people would say Kohli is the better captain. I think people think because Imran was captain in the 70/80s it means he is instantly better.

Kohli has a long way to surpass IK, but if he does I wouldn't be shocked.

 

[iPakistani]

9 losses in a row for captain Kohli. 3 with India and 6 with RCB. Kohli breaking records left centre and right.

 

[Ronaldo7]

Imran Khan was a great captain. I have no doubt about that. But I don't see why people think Kohli can't surpass him as captain. India have been on top of the test ranking for a while and if he wins a WC, isn't that a great captain? Dominating in his era and India are playing young players who will represent India well after Kohli has gone.

I think if Imran was captain 5/10 years ago with his record ,people would say Kohli is the better captain. I think people think because Imran was captain in the 70/80s it means he is instantly better.

Kohli has a long way to surpass IK, but if he does I wouldn't be shocked.

Kohli is not a good captain. He's on par with sachin. Kohli has a better team to lead hence better results are being presented. Rohit is a lot better.

 

[Bilal7]

Virat Kohli is a pretty poor captain. Imran? I don't think he's any better than Sarfaraz.

 

[MenInG]

9 losses in a row for captain Kohli. 3 with India and 6 with RCB. Kohli breaking records left centre and right.

Yet his team holds the Test mace?