Comparison between Babar Azam, Sachin Tendulkar & Virat Kohli at the same point in their ODI careers

[Mesozoic]

And vs top teams how many resulted in wins?

That ain't the question lol.

How many of those times did those top teams actually play atleast half their full strength bowling attack? And we all know the answer to that.

 

[Shoaib Akhtar 100 MPH]

None of Babars knocks are better than Kohli knocks.

Saying the same things over and over again wont make it true.

Kohli is an ATG batsmen in the league of Sachin, Richards, Ponting, Lara.

Babar is a tier 2 batsmen and not an ATG.

The comparison is as apt as between a Honda and a BMW.

And if all you have ever driven is the Honda, and work for Honda company I can see why you would market the Honda and its features and downplay the BMW.

But that doesnt make the Honda better.

Good luck trying to convince the world, though.

First its Babar has scored soft runs against weak attacks then we find and kohli has done the same with 25 of his hundreds.

Then its moves to kohli s hobart knock vs an "ATG" SL attack comprising of perera, Mahroof, kulasakera and Malinga etc who was a good bowler was better than any knock Babar has played

Debunked with Babar s Adelaide 100 vs a real ATG attack comprising of Starc, Hazelwood, Cummings, plus Zampa etc.

Now we are moving to cars. seeing as your curious about my car collection I have driven Ferraris s , Lamborghinis s
Mc clarens and owned BMWs , Mercedes, Lexus, VWs and Porsche.

You can keep your Honda although ironically some have BMW engines.

The truth is cricket is a game of monopoly where there is no level playing field and the rich dictate the rules and stack the odds in their favour.

The so called big 3 play more matches than anyone else and dictate to the spineless governing body.

What other sport do you see such discrepancies???. Its laughable how people want to debate with a straight face.

The boards with lesser finances end up loosing players to leagues which reduces the overall quality of international cricket

The truth is Babar at 29 has played a fraction of the matches than kohli or ten played as shared by the admin.

In my opinion if kohli retired today and Babar played on for another 5 years and then retired he still wont reach the amount of matches that kohli has played.

 

[Shoaib Akhtar 100 MPH]

That ain't the question lol.

How many of those times did those top teams actually play atleast half their full strength bowling attack? And we all know the answer to that.

The real question is why is there a monopoly where cricket boards with lesser finances are forced to loose their best players to franchise leagues and reduce the quality of international cricket???.

If international cricket is the pinnacle why is the governance of the sport so weak and pathetic that it gets dictated to by rich cricket boards???.

 

[Mamoon]

hey @Mamoon & @Bouncer- what say ?

Agreed. Babar is nowhere near Kohli and never will be. Kohli’s talent, skill and mental application are at a different level.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

First its Babar has scored soft runs against weak attacks then we find and kohli has done the same with 25 of his hundreds.

Then its moves to kohli s hobart knock vs an "ATG" SL attack comprising of perera, Mahroof, kulasakera and Malinga etc who was a good bowler was better than any knock Babar has played

Debunked with Babar s Adelaide 100 vs a real ATG attack comprising of Starc, Hazelwood, Cummings, plus Zampa etc.

Now we are moving to cars. seeing as your curious about my car collection I have driven Ferraris s , Lamborghinis s
Mc clarens and owned BMWs , Mercedes, Lexus, VWs and Porsche.

You can keep your Honda although ironically some have BMW engines.

The truth is cricket is a game of monopoly where there is no level playing field and the rich dictate the rules and stack the odds in their favour.

The so called big 3 play more matches than anyone else and dictate to the spineless governing body.

What other sport do you see such discrepancies???. Its laughable how people want to debate with a straight face.

The boards with lesser finances end up loosing players to leagues which reduces the overall quality of international cricket

The truth is Babar at 29 has played a fraction of the matches than kohli or ten played as shared by the admin.

In my opinion if kohli retired today and Babar played on for another 5 years and then retired he still wont reach the amount of matches that kohli has played.

The truth is playing increased number of matches doesnt actually improve your average or give you any unfair advantage.

If anything, it makes the averages worse because you are forced to perform at higher levels for increased number of games.

Its simple maths which you seem to not understand.

Which is why most players actually had a dip in their averages by the time they retired.

 

[Shoaib Akhtar 100 MPH]

The truth is playing increased number of matches doesnt actually improve your average or give you any unfair advantage.

If anything, it makes the averages worse because you are forced to perform at higher levels for increased number of games.

Its simple maths which you seem to not understand.

Which is why most players actually had a dip in their averages by the time they retired.

That's the weakest argument yet.

By your genius logic players should retire after 50 or 100 games and be called ATG if they have 50 plus averages.

Playing more matches gives players the opportunities to score more runs and centuries and break more records.

Only the best survive and carry on that trajectory. That's how we judge the best from the rest.

Longevity mixed with performances is one of the yard sticks.

Its simple maths which you don't seem to understand.

 

[Cricket Warrior]

Not Babar as a player, Babar’s stats. Stats don’t make a player better. There’s more to it.

If you are not a good student how do you get good grades? Or will you argue that those grades don't indicate that you are a better student?

so stats always matters because it defines ur efficiency!

 

[Bouncer]

hey @Mamoon & @Bouncer- what say ?

I never put these three in same sentence.

 

[Buffet]

If you are not a good student how do you get good grades? Or will you argue that those grades don't indicate that you are a better student?

so stats always matters because it defines ur efficiency!

Stats with context matter.

For example, Comparing raw stats of ODI games from 70s with the 2020s won't tell anything about players' relative positions. Because ODI games are evolving every 5-10 years. IN test format, relatively it has been constant so comparisons are not totally off target.

There is a simple yardstick to measure great players.

Do you stand out among your peers?

Do you play dominant innings to help your team?

Hashim had wonderful stats in ODI, but he was never the dominant player among his peers. He rarely played dominant innings to help his team. That's why when someone talks about ODI great, his name rarely comes up. He did not change his game even if needed. ODI games have evolved from when Hashim played and he had avg around 50 with SR near 90. But that stat is not going to put him as ATG simply due to his limitations. He couldn't hit big even if his life depended on it. Pretty similar to one name in this thread.

Good grades will surely tell something, but good grades in which exams. The exam should be meaningful. With teams not taking bilateral seriously in the last 4-5 years, the exam is simply standing out in WC in ODI. Not just have stats. If you are going to lay the claim on being top 3-4 in your era then be the top 3-4 in WC. You don't necessarily have to appear in the top 3-4 in all WC's but you got to stand out in some.

So good grades in the right exams.

Right exams in ODI : WC

The right exam in Test: performance in alien conditions.

 

[Mesozoic]

The real question is why is there a monopoly where cricket boards with lesser finances are forced to loose their best players to franchise leagues and reduce the quality of international cricket???.

If international cricket is the pinnacle why is the governance of the sport so weak and pathetic that it gets dictated to by rich cricket boards???.

But that's a whole another discussion.

Yes..It is sad that International bilateral cricket has taken the back seat (especially in white ball cricket) and teams have stopped caring about them, resulting in low quality stat padding and inflated averages for guys like Babar Azam, Imam ul Haq and even Shubman Gill to an extent in ODIs.

 

[Shoaib Akhtar 100 MPH]

Yes finally you're asking some valid questions. But that's a whole another discussion.

Yes..It is sad that International bilateral cricket has taken the back seat (especially in white ball cricket) and teams have stopped caring about them, resulting in low quality stat padding and inflated averages for guys like Babar Azam, Imam ul Haq and even Shubman Gill to an extent in ODIs.

The governing body and its leaches don't care. lets get it right.

The ICC needs dismantling and a new breakaway governing body needs to be formed to stop the rot before the sport heads into an Oasis.

we ve already discovered kohli has 25 of those low quality stat padding and inflated averages in ODIs.

 

[pakistani pride]

That ain't the question lol.

How many of those times did those top teams actually play atleast half their full strength bowling attack? And we all know the answer to that.

It was with regards to Babar Azam, He has very little match winning 100s VS the big teams. How can you even think of comparing Babar to Kohli or Sachin.

 

[Mesozoic]

we ve already discovered kohli has 25 of those low quality stat padding and inflated averages in ODIs.

Kohli has 50 ODI centuries.

Even if we consider what you're claiming is true, it'd only mean 50% of his centuries are stat padding or whatever. Whereas for Babar, 90% of his ODI hundreds are soft and forgettable bashing of second string bowling attacks. I honestly don't remember any of his top quality knocks except the one against NZ in the 2019 wc. That's the main difference that everyone talk about when discussing these two players and why Babar is nowhere near Kohli.

 

[Mesozoic]

It was with regards to Babar Azam, He has very little match winning 100s VS the big teams. This whole thread is a joke. How can you even think of comparing Babar to Kohli or Sachin.

Yes I was agreeing with you on this point. There's a reason why many of us compare him to Amla, the ODI player.

 

[big_gamer007]

2013-2023 is the Kohli Era.

Babar would be a distant character of the era he plays in. There are few others above him in pecking order in ODI’s

The comparison is moot. Kohli is couple of leagues above Babar in ODI

 

[hoshiarpurexpress]

Sachin is Rolls Royce of cricket, a regal run machine.
Virat is Ferrari, a mean machine.

Babar in comparison is a tuk tuk auto rickshaw.
No comparison really

 

[charlie007]

If you are not a good student how do you get good grades? Or will you argue that those grades don't indicate that you are a better student?

so stats always matters because it defines ur efficiency!

Nobody said Babar is a poor batsman, but when you compare him to the top elite of batsmanship, it’s not fair on him or the players who he is being compared to who have proven their mettle against the best and toughest of opponents and at a much higher level.

Babar is a very good batsman, and hopefully better years are ahead of him so let’s see how well he continues his development as a batsman.

 

[Shoaib Akhtar 100 MPH]

Kohli has 50 ODI centuries.

Even if we consider what you're claiming is true, it'd only mean 50% of his centuries are stat padding or whatever. Whereas for Babar, 90% of his ODI hundreds are soft and forgettable bashing of second string bowling attacks. I honestly don't remember any of his top quality knocks except the one against NZ in the 2019 wc. That's the main difference that everyone talk about when discussing these two players and why Babar is nowhere near Kohli.

That is my point all top players past and present including kohli have scored soft runs and there is no issue with that.

You can only play what's in front you and that's what Babar has done as well.


A lot of people on the forum seem to confuse praising a players achievements with another player has done xyz.


I will just clarify a few things from my point of view with regards to Babar and kohli

Babar has achievements and has broken some records and is on his way to being a great of the game but he has a way to go.

The lack of matches Babar has played at the same age compared to kohli and ten is staggering.

I feel the next 4 - 5 years will define Babar career and legacy when we can have a fair comparison between the two.


In my view kohli is a fantastic player who has achievements, records etc and is a great of the game.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

That's the weakest argument yet.

By your genius logic players should retire after 50 or 100 games and be called ATG if they have 50 plus averages.

Playing more matches gives players the opportunities to score more runs and centuries and break more records.

Only the best survive and carry on that trajectory. That's how we judge the best from the rest.

Longevity mixed with performances is one of the yard sticks.

Its simple maths which you don't seem to understand.

That is my point all top players past and present including kohli have scored soft runs and there is no issue with that.

You can only play what's in front you and that's what Babar has done as well.


A lot of people on the forum seem to confuse praising a players achievements with another player has done xyz.


I will just clarify a few things from my point of view with regards to Babar and kohli

Babar has achievements and has broken some records and is on his way to being a great of the game but he has a way to go.

The lack of matches Babar has played at the same age compared to kohli and ten is staggering.

I feel the next 4 - 5 years will define Babar career and legacy when we can have a fair comparison between the two.


In my view kohli is a fantastic player who has achievements, records etc and is a great of the game.

All fair.

But Babar will never be a great of the game.

You can bookmark my post and review 5 years later.

 

[Shoaib Akhtar 100 MPH]

All fair.

But Babar will never be a great of the game.

You can bookmark my post and review 5 years later.

Ill hold you to that man.

 

[PakEngFan]

Sachin is Rolls Royce of cricket, a regal run machine.
Virat is Ferrari, a mean machine.

Babar in comparison is a tuk tuk auto rickshaw.
No comparison really

Imagine an tuk tuk auto rickshaw has far better odi stats then rolls Royce. That rolls Royce must be Indian made in that case.

 

[Hitman]

Imagine an tuk tuk auto rickshaw has far better odi stats then rolls Royce. That rolls Royce must be Indian made in that case.

He has better ODI stats than any other player before the 2 new ball rule came into place, including Viv Richards

 

[BouncerGuy]

Babar has not played as many games as the other 2 have done. Such a comparison is only valid when they are standing in 1 line. As of yet, Babar is leading on the basis of stats but his number of games is almost 1/3 to even Virat.

 

[PakEngFan]

He has better ODI stats than any other player before the 2 new ball rule came into place, including Viv Richards

Lie again. Not sure what happens to you when Tendulkar is mentioned. Even his own parents won't defend him as much as you do. Viv played in a different era to choker Tendulkar and still has better average and Sr along with winning 2 world cups.

 

[Hitman]

Lie again. Not sure what happens to you when Tendulkar is mentioned. Even his own parents won't defend him as much as you do. Viv played in a different era to choker Tendulkar and still has better average and Sr along with winning 2 world cups.

Choker is someone who got smashed by Ajay Jadeja all over the park in the 96' WC, and by Tendulkar in the 03' WC, and couldn't help his team win a single WC in his entire career. Tendulkar won 1 in his career.

 

[Hitman]

Anyways, the guy isn't good enough to lace the boots of someone like Gautam Gambhir who helped us win the 2007 World T20 and the 2011 WC.

 

[PakEngFan]

Choker is someone who got smashed by Ajay Jadeja all over the park in the 96' WC, and by Tendulkar in the 03' WC, and couldn't help his team win a single WC in his entire career. Tendulkar won 1 in his career.

Didn't say waqar is not a choker. Tendulkar won a custom made world cup after failing a million times.

 

[PakEngFan]

Anyways, the guy isn't good enough to lace the boots of someone like Gautam Gambhir who helped us win the 2007 World T20 and the 2011 WC.

Agreed he's not easy near neither is Kohli or Tendulkar with limited world cups Gambhir won 2 while kholi and Tendulkar tried a million times and choked a million times like waqar.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

Jokes aside, anyone who thinks Babar is greater than Kohli currently or will become a better batsmen than Kohli has no clue about cricket.

Kohli is a generational player.

Babar is trying to stay relevant even among Pakistani cricketers. Even Inzimam is better than Babar currently. Younus also probably better than Babar in Tests.

 

[AMSS]

Babar may not be as good as Kohli but please, the latter is not a generational player. Lara, Sachin, McGrath, Warne...they were generational players.

Kohli is not in that bracket.