If Virat Kohli had been in a very weak and talent-less team?

[Savak]

It's just a question in my mind. No doubt he is a once in a generation player and an all time great already for me. But I wonder if his own batting performances and form would have taken a severe hit if his team mates in the batting order or the bowling order were not even close enough as good to even complement him and that the entire team's chances depended single handedly on him.

I use the decline in the batting form and fortunes of Ricky Ponting once the best players in Australian Cricket ie McGrath, Warne, Langer, Hayden, Gilchrist and Co all left the Australian team from 2007 onwards and the entire Australian team now seriously began to really depend on their captains batting and runs for success as the new batsmen in the side were not even close to being reliable.

For me Ponting the batsman was just not same onwards from 2007 onwards and his batting average slipped very badly at the end of his final few years and he even admitted in many interviews that in most normal circumstances he would have retired from Cricket much earlier or the selectors would have dropped him much earlier but compromises had to be made and the same ruthless standards that were practiced and applied in the past teams could not be applied because the talent stocks were bare and the team was just inexperienced to be without an experienced legend in the mix.

I am just wondering whether Kohli benefits from having a great bunch of talented batsmen at his disposal in all formats and the strongest bowling line up ever in Indian history. If India did not have such great batsmen and if he was the only real batsman in the team and no bowlers to speak off, would his own performances have suffered and would he have been pressurized by the massive dependancy by the team on his runs?

 

[Dead Ball]

How many Indian batsmen complimented Kohli in England 2018 or South Africa 2018? He was the lone warrior for India in those tough tours. KL Rahul and Pant came in form only in the dead rubber.

Kohli is one of those cricketers who thrives under pressure, just see how he has taken to the pressure of captaincy...my guess is he would have been even better in a worse team.

 

[Madplayer]

Then he would have been the best batsman and the best bowler and sometimes the best keeper in the world

 

[Savak]

How many Indian batsmen complimented Kohli in England 2018 or South Africa 2018? He was the lone warrior for India in those tough tours. KL Rahul and Pant came in form only in the dead rubber.

Kohli is one of those cricketers who thrives under pressure, just see how he has taken to the pressure of captaincy...my guess is he would have been even better in a worse team.

Then that would mean that an argument could be made that he deserves to be ranked higher than Ponting who was a total dud in Asian spinning conditions

 

[Ab Fan]

He would have been like Sachin Tendulkar. Would have taken his team close to victory and eventually throw it away.

In tests, that was exactly what happened in Edgabaston and Adelaide and also in Centurion.

In tests, he is to Pujara what Tendulkar was to Dravid.

In ODIs, Kohli has chased down some manmoth totals because of the team he had, even Sachin did it several times but more often he had a weak team which meant he was called off for not finishing game more often than Kohli does.

 

[Dead Ball]

Then that would mean that an argument could be made that he deserves to be ranked higher than Ponting who was a total dud in Asian spinning conditions

I would wait for a few more years to compare him with Ponting...dont forget Ponting averaged around 60 after 120 odd tests! Kohli has played just 77 tests so far...maybe after 100 tests we can compare them. Ponting, the test batsman is ahead for me , as of now. But Kohli certainly has the potential to equal or better him...

 

[WengerOut]

Then that would mean that an argument could be made that he deserves to be ranked higher than Ponting who was a total dud in Asian spinning conditions

Ponting was only bad in India if i am not wrong. Brian Lara also and he was supposed to be one of the best players of spin. It happens.

 

[kingusama92]

His earlier years might have turned out harder on a weaker team.

But his work ethic would eventually have won over leading to a one-man team.

If modern-day Kohli was dropped into a weak team, he would dominate. His game is pretty much flawless. An easy example of this is when Kohli outscored India AND England's batsmen in conditions he was supposed to be "weak" in.

The team wouldn't win much but he'd still do well.

 

[Hitman]

Sachin (throughout the 90's), Lara (after the retirement of Ambrose and Walsh around 2000) and Andy Flower played in weak teams. Yet their performances remained top class.

Kohli is someone who thrives under pressure. He would have been the same player even if he played for a weak team.

 

[Dead Ball]

He would have been like Sachin Tendulkar. Would have taken his team close to victory and eventually throw it away.

In tests, that was exactly what happened in Edgabaston and Adelaide and also in Centurion.

In tests, he is to Pujara what Tendulkar was to Dravid.

In ODIs, Kohli has chased down some manmoth totals because of the team he had, even Sachin did it several times but more often he had a weak team which meant he was called off for not finishing game more often than Kohli does.

Kohli's finishing is comfortably better than SRT in ODIs. Besides SRT was a walking wicket outside the subcontinent in the 90s (great bowling is not an excuse, he faced some mediocre English/NZ attacks in 90s ODI away from home, he still failed) Where SRT is ahead is his performance in WC's and tournament finals. In these criteria , he is second only to Viv and Kohli is nowhere close. He has a good chance to rectify that in WC 2019.

In tests, Kohli has a lot to prove before he reaches SRT/Ponting level.

 

[Bhaijaan]

It would have made zero difference because then he would simply be continuation of Sachin/Lara for India/West Indies in the 2010s. Batsmen tend to enjoy power. A strong batsman in a weak team has the complete freedom to play whichever way he likes and that makes him more dangerous and prolific.

Batsmanship indeed is the most selfish act of the sport. I could be a batsman under pressure to hit a run a ball 50 for a top team but for a bottom ranked team i could hit a 100 off 120 balls and still be a hero.

Bowlers on the other hand desperately require quality support bowlers at the other end to maintain pressure. If i don't have quality support bowlers then opponents would just play out my overs without any worry.

 

[Indiafan]

Kohli's finishing is comfortably better than SRT in ODIs. .

Usually the difference between an ODI opener and no 3. Can you list any ATG opener who was also a finisher? Hayden? Sehwag? Gilchrist? Ganguly? Anwar? None of them finished innings

 

[Dead Ball]

Usually the difference between an ODI opener and no 3. Can you list any ATG opener who was also a finisher? Hayden? Sehwag? Gilchrist? Ganguly? Anwar? None of them finished innings

How many number 3 batsmen in ODIs have been finishers?

That's the thing, the top 3 batsmen are usually meant to build a solid foundation. Kohli is an exception in that regard. He not only sets up a run chase, but more often than not he doesn't get out till the chase is in control. SRT was great will chasing, and has finished some tough run chases as well, especially in big games but Kohli is a different beast. Take his 129 not out in SA last year for example...came in at 1-19 chasing 205 against Morkel/Ngidi/Tahir and finished the game within 32 overs at an SR of almost 140!

Tendulkar's finest chase for me was his 117* in Sydney in a final against an excellent Aussie attack. A masterful run chase. But Kohli does it a lot more frequently.

 

[Indiafan]

How many number 3 batsmen in ODIs have been finishers?

That's the thing, the top 3 batsmen are usually meant to build a solid foundation. Kohli is an exception in that regard. He not only sets up a run chase, but more often than not he doesn't get out till the chase is in control. SRT was great will chasing, and has finished some tough run chases as well, especially in big games but Kohli is a different beast. Take his 129 not out in SA last year for example...came in at 1-19 chasing 205 against Morkel/Ngidi/Tahir and finished the game within 32 overs at an SR of almost 140!

Tendulkar's finest chase for me was his 117* in Sydney in a final against an excellent Aussie attack. A masterful run chase. But Kohli does it a lot more frequently.

Many no 3 like Santa, Ponting, etc were great finishers

 

[Dead Ball]

Many no 3 like Santa, Ponting, etc were great finishers

Tendulkar has arguably finished more matches than Ponting and Sangakkara...

When i talk about finishing i am talking about players like Dhoni and Bevan...Kohli averages what...95 in winning run chases? I know that's not the only criteria of establishing a great finisher, but is a good indicator to his finishing abilities despite being a top 3 batsman. I doubt any other top 3 batsman in history averages even 60 in won run chases....

 

[Savak]

Ponting's stock for me fell given the way how he drastically declined as a batsmen from 2007-2008 onwards. He did not handle the pressure of the Australian team being super dependent on him very well.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Kohli is Kohli because he is from Tendulkar land.

 

[topspin]

In a weak side he would have been Tendulkar of the 90s who didn't just prevail but averaged around 60 during this period of time and in the process established himself as the best batsman of the decade.

 

[BreadPakoda]

Many no 3 like Santa, Ponting, etc were great finishers

Great finishers? Like Kohli? Yes, Santa Claus maybe.

 

[saintgrace]

Virat kohli , weak , talentless in same sentence.

 

[Robert]

It's just a question in my mind. No doubt he is a once in a generation player and an all time great already for me. But I wonder if his own batting performances and form would have taken a severe hit if his team mates in the batting order or the bowling order were not even close enough as good to even complement him and that the entire team's chances depended single handedly on him.

I use the decline in the batting form and fortunes of Ricky Ponting once the best players in Australian Cricket ie McGrath, Warne, Langer, Hayden, Gilchrist and Co all left the Australian team from 2007 onwards and the entire Australian team now seriously began to really depend on their captains batting and runs for success as the new batsmen in the side were not even close to being reliable.

For me Ponting the batsman was just not same onwards from 2007 onwards and his batting average slipped very badly at the end of his final few years and he even admitted in many interviews that in most normal circumstances he would have retired from Cricket much earlier or the selectors would have dropped him much earlier but compromises had to be made and the same ruthless standards that were practiced and applied in the past teams could not be applied because the talent stocks were bare and the team was just inexperienced to be without an experienced legend in the mix.

I am just wondering whether Kohli benefits from having a great bunch of talented batsmen at his disposal in all formats and the strongest bowling line up ever in Indian history. If India did not have such great batsmen and if he was the only real batsman in the team and no bowlers to speak off, would his own performances have suffered and would he have been pressurized by the massive dependancy by the team on his runs?

The batsmen who lost 1-4 to the worst England side ever?

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

He is already in a weak team.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

The batsmen who lost 1-4 to the worst England side ever?

You were lucky that future GOAT KL Rahul came back to form in the last inning.

 

[Dead Ball]

The batsmen who lost 1-4 to the worst England side ever?

Anderson-Broad-Root-Stokes-Ali-Buttler and even an over the hill Cook could hardly be called the worst English bunch ever...there have been some really bad English teams in the past.

How about this one?

http://www.espncricinfo.com/series/16457/scorecard/63599/india-vs-england-2nd-test-england-tour-of-india-1992-93

Struggling to think of a worse bowling attack EVER fielded by a non minnow side...i think their overall bowling average would be 50+.

 

[MP2011]

The batsmen who lost 1-4 to the worst England side ever?

Lol, are you for real?

 

[rhony]

The batsmen who lost 1-4 to the worst England side ever?

It's definitely the worst England batting lineup ever but same can't be said about the bowling. The low scores on both sides for the most part vouches to that.