Is Virat Kohli the greatest Indian batsman ever?

[Savak]

For me, he only has one test to pass i.e. succeeding on the English Green tops against James Anderson. If he passes that then he will definitely be India's best batsman ever.

Can Indian's shed some light on what Kohli's record is on huge dustbowls where there is crazy spin and against quality spinners? Would he be able to comfortably maul a peak Shane Warne, Murlitharan in tough batting conditions?

But after that he has done brilliantly everywhere else and has ticked all the boxes.

But what I really like about the guy is his unreal work ethic and how hard he works behind the scenes on his batting day in day out to be the best in all formats and how he transformed himself fitness wise. He has done all this while not giving up on the celebrity lifestyle either. These things are not easy for people to sustain as their bank balances and distractions grow and where the drive to maintain the work ethic diminishes when you are no longer a hungry boy with $0 in your pockets. Mike Tyson is a classic example of how the only place where you can go once you get to the very top is just down below the pit.

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

No. Sachin Tendulkar is.

 

[Chief Destroyer]

Yes. Most teams would rather see Sachin on the field than Kohli. He's just that dangerous. The longer he stays the more invincible he becomes.

 

[proud_pakistani]

Gavaskar and Sachin still ahead for me since they played tougher bowling attacks.

 

[Sam99]

Nope has to be gavaskar & tendulkar ahead of him even if he easily break their records.

 

[Sachin136]

If you consider all 3 formats, then yes. But I can't think of any batsman even outside of India who was as good as Kohli over all formats.

In just tests and ODIs, Sachin is ahead.

 

[troodon]

Irrespective of whether Kohli succeeds against Jimmy Anderson and England, if Kohli continues this form for another 5-7 years, nobody will deny he is the best batsman ever produced by India. Heck, he will even be rated above the likes of Viv.

If, Kohli can score 100 centuries, then he will over take Sachin. Currently he has 56 centuries. Another 44 and he will equal Sachin.

I am thinking Kohli will be at his peak for another 5 years. He is scoring close to 8 centuries per year ODI's + Tests combined. So by 35, he will score another 40 centuries and it will be 96 centuries. Then if he can eek out another 5 centuries, he will surpass Sachin.

Kohli surpassing Sachin is not far fetched. But a lot has to go his way. Especially injuries.

 

[WildSwing]

Nope, Sachin is

 

[Spectrum]

Guru is Always greater than his chelaa..
Sachin will be always better than Kohli..

 

[Send1983]

Yes. Most teams would rather see Sachin on the field than Kohli. He's just that dangerous. The longer he stays the more invincible he becomes.

Looks like you didn5 see Sachin in 90s. Got it.

 

[rhony]

He surely is. Kohli can easily do what Sachin did. He has this killer instinct that only few possess.

 

[bujhee kom]

No. Sachin Tendulkar is.

Nope. Gavaskar.
Tests matter most and he was better.

 

[Ab Fan]

Sachin is.

Kohli to SRT will always remain like McGrath to Lillee.

Yes, I will take Kohli over Gavaskar though. Gavaskar might have been a champion in his era and while I agree he would have adjusted to limited format in this era, he won't have been one of their best batsmen at any cost.

 

[Send1983]

Nope. Gavaskar.
Tests matter most and he was better.

That’s your opinion. IMHO Sachin was better than Gavasker in test too.

 

[WildSwing]

Sachin is.

Kohli to SRT will always remain like McGrath to Lillee.

Yes, I will take Kohli over Gavaskar though. Gavaskar might have been a champion in his era and while I agree he would have adjusted to limited format in this era, he won't have been one of their best batsmen at any cost.

Mcgrath was better than Lillee, Kohli right now is far far behind sachin because of the test format, in limited overs he's fast catching up to sachin, but in tests he is so far behind that it will take a humungous effort from Kohli to get close to sachin in that format, if he does that he can get ahead of sachin but right now he's behind.

 

[Rahul1]

Guru is Always greater than his chelaa..
Sachin will be always better than Kohli..

Says who?

 

[Bhaijaan]

Tendulkar would have been monstrous in this era as a batsman. Comfortably the greatest batsman to have ever played the game except for maybe Don Bradman.

 

[Ab Fan]

Mcgrath was better than Lillee, Kohli right now is far far behind sachin because of the test format, in limited overs he's fast catching up to sachin, but in tests he is so far behind that it will take a humungous effort from Kohli to get close to sachin in that format, if he does that he can get ahead of sachin but right now he's behind.

McGrath wasn't better than Lillee. No need for stats.

When the whole Australians claim that McGrath can never match the aura of Lillee, then who are we to disagree with that. Lillee revolutionised fast bowling. Nobody comes ahead of him except Malcolm Marshall.

 

[WildSwing]

McGrath wasn't better than Lillee. No need for stats.

When the whole Australians claim that McGrath can never match the aura of Lillee, then who are we to disagree with that. Lillee revolutionised fast bowling. Nobody comes ahead of him except Malcolm Marshall.

People always turn to intangibles like aura, talent and some other rubbish to validate their inaccurate claims since they know that facts don't support them. It's funny how you said "no need for stats" because even you know that you will be exposed brutally if the stats are presented.

You can keep living in the intangibles but mcgrath was the greatest fast bowler in history, probably tied with marshall at the very least

 

[Savak]

Irrespective of whether Kohli succeeds against Jimmy Anderson and England, if Kohli continues this form for another 5-7 years, nobody will deny he is the best batsman ever produced by India. Heck, he will even be rated above the likes of Viv.

If, Kohli can score 100 centuries, then he will over take Sachin. Currently he has 56 centuries. Another 44 and he will equal Sachin.

I am thinking Kohli will be at his peak for another 5 years. He is scoring close to 8 centuries per year ODI's + Tests combined. So by 35, he will score another 40 centuries and it will be 96 centuries. Then if he can eek out another 5 centuries, he will surpass Sachin.

Kohli surpassing Sachin is not far fetched. But a lot has to go his way. Especially injuries.

Tendulkar for now is better on seaming wickets than Kohli. Tendulkar will not look clueless for the entire duration of a series, he would have found a way to neutralize and deal with Anderson on those pitches and conditions.

 

[Ab Fan]

People always turn to intangibles like aura, talent and some other rubbish to validate their inaccurate claims since they know that facts don't support them. It's funny how you said "no need for stats" because even you know that you will be exposed brutally if the stats are presented.

You can keep living in the intangibles but mcgrath was the greatest fast bowler in history, probably tied with marshall at the very least

LMAO, the obsession among Indian fans for McGrath continues. It is not only about aura but Lillee was the one who revolutionised fast bowling and inspired bowlers lIke Richards Hadlee and Imran Khan who went on to became the legends of the game.

Do you think you know more than what is considered as a general consensus in Australia by their experts, fans and their ex- cricketers among their two pace bowlers, Lillee and McGrath?

As for his stats, no it won't be exposed lol. Lillee was having back issue when he toured Pakistan. Also, are you aware of the fact that Pakistan were so scared of Lillee that they served some absolute dead wickets to reduce his fear? Do check the stats of other bowlers in that series.

There are many lists of greatest cricketers of all-time by experts and ex-cricketer and you would see Lillee being rated very high. He is one of the most iconic cricketers the world has ever seen. Many fast bowlers of 80s were inspired by Lillee. There is no need of cricinfo filters to undermine his greatness.

 

[sshakir411]

Not yet, but he will be.

 

[TM Riddle]

No Tendulkar is.
But if Kohli maintains this beastly form of his for 4 more years including scoring heavily in the world cup, he would leave everyone behind.

 

[CadPakFan]

At the moment, in my book, I will Tendulkar and Gavaskar are ahead of him.

 

[Ab Fan]

People always turn to intangibles like aura, talent and some other rubbish to validate their inaccurate claims since they know that facts don't support them. It's funny how you said "no need for stats" because even you know that you will be exposed brutally if the stats are presented.

You can keep living in the intangibles but mcgrath was the greatest fast bowler in history, probably tied with marshall at the very least

To make things more clear, while many people can keep arguing on who is better between Lillee and McGrath and either of the two can win(younger ones will pick McGrath and that is understandable), the fact is Lillee will always remain way more iconic than McGrath.

It is quite similar when you compare a Kohli to SRT. While Kohli may be regarded by younger fans as a better cricketer/batsmen than Tendulkar once he retired, however, SRT will always remain way more iconic than Kohli.

Basically that is what my point is. Kohli to SRT will always be like McGrath to Lillee. However, the only difference is cricinfo filters won't undermine SRT's greatness 30 years ahead like they are doing to Lillee.

 

[Dead Ball]

Sachin was more complete, Kohli is mentally stronger. And fitter too.

I would place my bets on Kohli to surpass him in the next 3-4 years.

Gavaskar was a pathetic ODI batsman and hence would never make it to my debate of greatest batsman ever.

 

[Robert]

Gavaskar.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

Not yet. He needs to do well in England and World Cup elimination rounds. In ODIs he has almost surpassed Sachin, but nowhere in tests

 

[BreadPakoda]

Has been dominating only for six years. Long way to go.

 

[The_Odd_One]

He needs one good World Cup to beat Tendulkar.

If I want to win a match, I would be happy to bowl to Tendulkar than Kohli.

 

[Varun]

This thread's a classic example of getting carried away with what's going on in front of you.

 

[VijayTamilan]

Tendulkar for now is better on seaming wickets than Kohli. Tendulkar will not look clueless for the entire duration of a series, he would have found a way to neutralize and deal with Anderson on those pitches and conditions.

Kohli went through an inexplicable rut around that time. He failed even in the phattas that were provided for the ODIs. This despite the fact that Kohli had scored that 119 in the first innings of the Wanderers Test match - where the ball was seaming for the first few days - under a year ago at that point.

Not many batsmen get tougher tracks than what was provided in the recently concluded Ind-SA series; Kohli outshone every batsman in that series by scoring 286 at 47 (with the only century of the series, the 153, and those 54 & 41 at the Wanderers - that Wanderers track).

 

[Cuts_and_cuts_hard]

In tests, still behind Sachin Gavaskar and Dravid

Overall in all format, only behind Sachin, but catching up quickly.

 

[Indiafan]

Yes. Most teams would rather see Sachin on the field than Kohli. He's just that dangerous. The longer he stays the more invincible he becomes.

in his prime, the same thing was said of sachin

 

[Rishta Aunty]

Nope. In Tests Tendulkar, Gavaskar and Dravid are ahead. (One could even argue for Laxman right now in terms of the number of clutch matching-shaping innings he's played in Tests though Kohli is probably level)

In ODI's he's only behind Tendulkar.

Across formats, he's only behind Tendulkar.

Gotta say, India really did have an unbelievable batting peak the last decade. I don't think the current batting line-up can hold a candle to that overall.

 

[WhenSultansBowled]

In Test cricket no. Although I won't be surprised if I change my mind after a couple of seasons.

In ODI cricket, he is on the way to surpass SRT. That tells about man's greatness

 

[WildSwing]

LMAO, the obsession among Indian fans for McGrath continues. It is not only about aura but Lillee was the one who revolutionised fast bowling and inspired bowlers lIke Richards Hadlee and Imran Khan who went on to became the legends of the game.

Again with the intangibles like revolutionised and what not, you simply can't argue with facts so hide behind this nonsense

Do you think you know more than what is considered as a general consensus in Australia by their experts, fans and their ex- cricketers among their two pace bowlers, Lillee and McGrath?

Lol Australian fans? The Indian fans also think sachin is the greatest batsman of all time, next time you decide someone's credentials based on based on fans opinions just remember to acknowledge Sachin as the greatest cricketer of all time (which is true btw). As for the experts and ex cricketers, I am not a weak minded person to simply accept what some ex cricketer says ( not even sure what you said about ex cricketers is true in the first place or not). Do you seriously want to go down the road of ex cricketer's opinions, you will open a whole new pandora's box if you go down that road.

As for his stats, no it won't be exposed lol. Lillee was having back issue when he toured Pakistan. Also, are you aware of the fact that Pakistan were so scared of Lillee that they served some absolute dead wickets to reduce his fear? Do check the stats of other bowlers in that series.

Lol he will be exposed if you have to come with explanations to explain his stats ) Another intangible "fear"

There are many lists of greatest cricketers of all-time by experts and ex-cricketer and you would see Lillee being rated very high. He is one of the most iconic cricketers the world has ever seen. Many fast bowlers of 80s were inspired by Lillee. There is no need of cricinfo filters to undermine his greatness.

Please list those lists by all time experts and prove lille makes more lists than mcgrath, don't just babble what comes to your mind, back it up with facts.

Ah there's another intangible "iconic" ) You really have no ground to stand on when it comes to facts, you will keep hiding behind nonsense like "iconic" or "inspired", guess what even afridi is one of the most iconic cricketers in pakistan does it make him the one of the best pakistani cricketer? I already predicted what you will say

 

[Ab Fan]

Again with the intangibles like revolutionised and what not, you simply can't argue with facts so hide behind this nonsense



<B>Lol Australian fans? The Indian fans also think sachin is the greatest batsman of all time,</B> next time you decide someone's credentials based on based on fans opinions just remember to acknowledge Sachin as the greatest cricketer of all time (which is true btw). As for the experts and ex cricketers, I am not a weak minded person to simply accept what some ex cricketer says ( not even sure what you said about ex cricketers is true in the first place or not). Do you seriously want to go down the road of ex cricketer's opinions, you will open a whole new pandora's box if you go down that road.



Lol he will be exposed if you have to come with explanations to explain his stats ) Another intangible "fear"



Please list those lists by all time experts and prove lille makes more lists than mcgrath, don't just babble what comes to your mind, back it up with facts.

Ah there's another intangible "iconic" ) You really have no ground to stand on when it comes to facts, you will keep hiding behind nonsense like "iconic" or "inspired", guess what even afridi is one of the most iconic cricketers in pakistan does it make him the one of the best pakistani cricketer? I already predicted what you will say

If Indian fans, public and critics think Tendulkar is the best batsmen India have produced then that will remain the fact. Unless they put Kohli or anyone else on a higher pedestal, it doesn't matter what non-Indians think.

You are claiming "best batsmen of all time" which is laughable comparison. Australians can decide who is <B>their</B> greatest/iconic bowler and so can Indians. They alone cant decide if that given name is the greatest player of all-time or not.

As for the other part, well, people who watch cricket on cricinfo will never be able to understand.

You can say McGrath is better than Lillee which many might agree but Lillee will always be remembered way more iconic than McGrath. The analogy is similar to Kohli/Tendulkar(ofcourse Kohli has to still climb tough yards in tests) where many might pick Kohli over Tendulkar but the latter will always remain more iconic than the former.

Afridi is the most popular cricketer in Pakistan not iconic lol and his legacy is nowhere near to what it is for Lillee or other influential cricketers like him. Do share what you predicted?

 

[WildSwing]

If Indian fans, public and critics think Tendulkar is the best batsmen India have produced then that will remain the fact. Unless they put Kohli or anyone else on a higher pedestal, it doesn't matter what non-Indians think.

You are claiming "best batsmen of all time" which is laughable comparison. Australians can decide who is <B>their</B> greatest/iconic bowler and so can Indians. They alone cant decide if that given name is the greatest player of all-time or not.

As for the other part, well, people who watch cricket on cricinfo will never be able to understand.

You can say McGrath is better than Lillee which many might agree but Lillee will always be remembered way more iconic than McGrath. The analogy is similar to Kohli/Tendulkar(ofcourse Kohli has to still climb tough yards in tests) where many might pick Kohli over Tendulkar but the latter will always remain more iconic than the former.

Afridi is the most popular cricketer in Pakistan not iconic lol and his legacy is nowhere near to what it is for Lillee or other influential cricketers like him. Do share what you predicted?

Again you babble so much but say absolutely nothing. Why didn't you post all those lists you were claiming about earlier and prove mcgrath was chosen by lesser experts, I know facts aren't your strong suit but I expected a bit more than this. The Australians can decide who their biggest cricketer is but that's not what I am arguing about here, now am I? I am arguing that mcgrath was a much better bowler than lillee, this is not a popularity contest, it is a contest about their cricketing abilities, and mcgrath wins it.

 

[Ab Fan]

Again you babble so much but say absolutely nothing. Why didn't you post all those lists you were claiming about earlier and prove mcgrath was chosen by lesser experts, I know facts aren't your strong suit but I expected a bit more than this. The Australians can decide who their biggest cricketer is but that's not what I am arguing about here, now am I? I am arguing that mcgrath was a much better bowler than lillee, this is not a popularity contest, it is a contest about their cricketing abilities, and mcgrath wins it.

Ability wise, McGrath is nowhere near Lillee. Lillee was iconic cricketer not some popular name as you are stating, just like Tendulkar. I will put the list.

 

[WildSwing]

Ability wise, McGrath is nowhere near Lillee. Lillee was iconic cricketer not some popular name as you are stating, just like Tendulkar. I will put the list.

lol again with iconic rubbish Mcgrath was arguably the greatest bowler of all time, he was easily ahead of lillee

 

[Ab Fan]

ESPN legends of cricket:-

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...ends-of-Cricket-Top-25-Cricketers-Of-All-Time

Lillee at 6, Tendulkar at 7, Marshall at 16.

David Gower 50 greatest cricketer of all-time:-

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...id-Gower-s-50-Greatest-Cricketers-of-All-Time

Lillee at 16, McGrath at 29.

Imran Khan considers Dennis Lillee the greatest bowlers of his time.

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...Lillee-the-best-bowler-of-his-time&highlight=

Richard Hadlee also considers him as one of the bowlers he got inspired by.

Now coming to your hillarious comment on bringing Afridi, can you believe Kallis or Sangakkara or even Flintoff or other future legends of the game(all-rounders) saying the same about Afridi. <B>Imagine a player of Hadlee, Imran, Thomson level(from current era) claiming Shahid Afridi is the guy I look forward to.</B>

You can pick McGrath over Lillee as better bowler, heck even I shall also pick him but the fact remains that Lillee was wayy more iconic than McGrath.

Using the same analogy, many of us will pick Kohli over Tendulkar but Tendulkar will always remain more iconic cricketer than Kohli was.That is what my point was.

Rest, you can keep your cricinfo filters. I am not making a claim that Lillee is a better bowler to McGrath(because I haven't seen him) but he is way more iconic than him, quite similar to Kohli,who may become a superior batsmen than Tendulkar when the former retires but latter will always remain more iconic.

Afridi stands nowhere near, lol.

 

[Savage]

ATM no

 

[Robert]

ESPN legends of cricket:-

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...ends-of-Cricket-Top-25-Cricketers-Of-All-Time

Lillee at 6, Tendulkar at 7, Marshall at 16.

David Gower 50 greatest cricketer of all-time:-

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...id-Gower-s-50-Greatest-Cricketers-of-All-Time

Lillee at 16, McGrath at 29.

Imran Khan considers Dennis Lillee the greatest bowlers of his time.

http://www.pakpassion.net/ppforum/s...Lillee-the-best-bowler-of-his-time&highlight=

Richard Hadlee also considers him as one of the bowlers he got inspired by.

Now coming to your hillarious comment on bringing Afridi, can you believe Kallis or Sangakkara or even Flintoff or other future legends of the game(all-rounders) saying the same about Afridi. <B>Imagine a player of Hadlee, Imran, Thomson level(from current era) claiming Shahid Afridi is the guy I look forward to.</B>

You can pick McGrath over Lillee as better bowler, heck even I shall also pick him but the fact remains that Lillee was wayy more iconic than McGrath.

Using the same analogy, many of us will pick Kohli over Tendulkar but Tendulkar will always remain more iconic cricketer than Kohli was.That is what my point was.

Rest, you can keep your cricinfo filters. I am not making a claim that Lillee is a better bowler to McGrath(because I haven't seen him) but he is way more iconic than him, quite similar to Kohli,who may become a superior batsmen than Tendulkar when the former retires but latter will always remain more iconic.

Afridi stands nowhere near, lol.

I'm prepared to accept that McGrath surpassed Lillee overall. But the latter was so inspirational to a generation. He was the first modern fast bowler. He changed the game - Clive Lloyd knew he needed two Lillees and two Thomsons to compete. Lillee had that beautiful run up, all economy of movement and pure menace. Hadlee slavishly copied his action and even his facial hair. Imran learned the fast leg-break from him, saw his sheer refusal to quit on those dead Aussie wickets, and started building his fitness to bowl long fast spells.

 

[cricketindiafan]

Far from it, IMO he is at number 4 right now after Sachin, Gavaskar, Dravid.

But Kohli has already built a legacy - No Indian batsman in future can exect to get picked if he is not a fitness freak. Kohli has taken this culture of extreme fitness to a different level and it is slowly seeping into our youth system.

 

[Hasan123]

Not at the moment. But he's getting there. If he performs in England and helps India win a WC. He will have surpassed all Indian batsmen.

 

[Justcrazy]

Gavaskar was greatest Indian batsman in Test , no doubts on it.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

Gavaskar was greatest Indian batsman in Test , no doubts on it.

Gavaskar is amongst my top 3 batsman of all time in tests, ahead of Tendulkar.

 

[Send1983]

Gavaskar was greatest Indian batsman in Test , no doubts on it.

So If Gavasker is better than Sachin, then he is second best after Bradman. Hopefully Pak fans don’t have any issue accepting it.

 

[Braveheart]

Once Kholi Proves himself in England, he will be the Greatest ever Batsman of this era and way ahead of Tendulkar in all batting attributes. It's just a matter of time that he will break most of Sachin's records.

I rate Gavaskar as the greatest Batsman of the 70's & 80's era, when he performed majestically against the most feared bowling attack of the West Indies, in a time when there were an unlimited amount of bouncers allowed in an over, and no Helmets to protect the Batsman.

 

[hadi123]

I'm a lot younger so haven't seen as many generations but whenever I see India play, I know they're always in the game when Kohli is there. Guy is incredible.

 

[Mamoon]

I believe he is. At this point, I would probably rank him in the top 5 most complete batsmen to have played the game.

He is pretty much set to be the greatest ever Limited Overs player, and is well on his way to ATG status in Test cricket as well. Could very well end up as the best batsman of the last 30-40 years, since it is hard to compare modern players with the ones who played prior to the 1970's.

Tendulkar was a genius, but Kohli's killer instinct puts him at a higher pedestal. If you want to beat India, you have to nip him early - if not, he will grab the game by the balls and run away with it.

The idea that Tendulkar was not a match-winner is Pakistani nonsense, but Kohli is clearly a bigger match-winner, and if he scores big, India will win 9/10 times.

 

[Adijazz1706]

Once Kholi Proves himself in England, he will be the Greatest ever Batsman of this era and way ahead of Tendulkar in all batting attributes. It's just a matter of time that he will break most of Sachin's records.

I rate Gavaskar as the greatest Batsman of the 70's & 80's era, when he performed majestically against the most feared bowling attack of the West Indies, in a time when there were an unlimited amount of bouncers allowed in an over, and no Helmets to protect the Batsman.

Gavaskar's WI stats are inflated by the 71 tour before the pace battery started and the 79 tour when he played a 2nd string side as the 1st team was playing in Packer cricket. Otherwise he struggled like other Indian batters except Amarnath

 

[IndianFan2018]

Gavaskar's WI stats are inflated by the 71 tour before the pace battery started and the 79 tour when he played a 2nd string side as the 1st team was playing in Packer cricket. Otherwise he struggled like other Indian batters except Amarnath

Experts from Gavaskar era all clearly mentioned and appreciated how well he handled and scored vs real pace bowlers without helmet on unvovered pitches with no limit to bouncers. You can't score 10k test runs without facing pacers. Respect your opinion...but must give credit where it's due IMO

PS: Gavaskar was a opener ...

 

[Proactive_]

With an away Test average of 45? Nice joke.

 

[light]

At the current moment, probably on par with Tendulkar. But one thing that seperates Virat and Sachin is their personality. If i have to compare them with animals, Sachin was a tiger, Kholi is a Trex. Would try to stop on you + performs.

By the end of his carreer (if he continues his form for the next couple of years) - arguably will be one of the best, if not the best and will definitely over take Sachin in terms of batting skills.

 

[Bewal Express]

Unless it goes totally pear shaped for him, Kohli looks like he will be amongst the best 10 batsman to play the game. The guy is tough, determined and talented; Statistically he will get close to being one of the best ever but bar the odd attack, he won't face the great bowlers to allow him to claim that he is the best ever.

 

[WildSwing]

Unless it goes totally pear shaped for him, Kohli looks like he will be amongst the best 10 batsman to play the game. The guy is tough, determined and talented; Statistically he will get close to being one of the best ever but bar the odd attack, he won't face the great bowlers to allow him to claim that he is the best ever.

Rabada, Hazlewood, Starc, Steyn, Anderson, Broad, Morkel, Boult, Southee as good as the great bowlers of the past. Since 2013 has been the second most difficult phase for batting since the 1990s, this great bowler argument doesn't hold up in test cricket

 

[WildSwing]

At the current moment, probably on par with Tendulkar. But one thing that seperates Virat and Sachin is their personality. If i have to compare them with animals, Sachin was a tiger, Kholi is a Trex. Would try to stop on you + performs.

By the end of his carreer (if he continues his form for the next couple of years) - arguably will be one of the best, if not the best and will definitely over take Sachin in terms of batting skills.

Kohli isn't even on the same planet as sachin in test cricket, it's hilarious to see people putting him on par with sachin, in odis he has a case but unless he closes the gap in test cricket he won't be anywhere near sachin

 

[Bewal Express]

For me the best 5/6 test players(i have seen)
Richards
Lara
Tendulkar
Ponting
M Crowe
Kohli
Positions 2-4 no particular order. Much of muchness, Pointing the better player of fast bowlers, the other 2 better at playing spin.

 

[light]

Kohli isn't even on the same planet as sachin in test cricket, it's hilarious to see people putting him on par with sachin, in odis he has a case but unless he closes the gap in test cricket he won't be anywhere near sachin

Are you watching the same cricket as the rest of us mate? He averages above 45 outside of asia and is finally starting to pick up the 100's faster in test. So what are you exactly on? An avg of 45 is hilarious to you in conditions he does not regularly play in?

 

[WildSwing]

Are you watching the same cricket as the rest of us mate? He averages above 45 outside of asia and is finally starting to pick up the 100's faster in test. So what are you exactly on? An avg of 45 is hilarious to you in conditions he does not regularly play in?

Do you even comprehend bro? What does his away average of 45 got to do with this? Sachin has almost 16k test runs with 50+ test centuries and an average above 40 in every country. Kohli is improving in tests but right now he's way way behind sachin in the test format, do I even have to explain the gap between the two? You can't put kohli on par with sachin when he's so far behind sachin in the test format at the moment

 

[light]

Do you even comprehend bro? What does his away average of 45 got to do with this? Sachin has almost 16k test runs with 50+ test centuries and an average above 40 in every country. Kohli is improving in tests but right now he's way way behind sachin in the test format, do I even have to explain the gap between the two? You can't put kohli on par with sachin when he's so far behind sachin in the test format at the moment

What are you jibbering about mate? My initial post was about his attitude/skill towards batting. It's a no brainer that Sachin has more run under his belt simply because he played more matches and not to mention retired now.

 

[WildSwing]

What are you jibbering about mate? My initial post was about his attitude/skill towards batting. It's a no brainer that Sachin has more run under his belt simply because he played more matches and not to mention retired now.

Not just runs, but average and a much more balance record, maybe your comprehension skills are low so let me explain it more slowly, Tendulkar averaged more than 57 after 177 tests, at the age of 29 (which is the current age of kohli) Sachin was rated as the second greatest test batsman of all time by wisden, sachin had scored 30+ centuries by the age of 29, Kohli right now is not even the best test batsman of his era, sachin is far far ahead of kohli not just because of runs or matches but because he was a much much bigger player than Kohli in test cricket, Kohli has a lot of work to do if he has to catch up with sachin in test cricket

 

[light]

Not just runs, but average and a much more balance record, maybe your comprehension skills are low so let me explain it more slowly, Tendulkar averaged more than 57 after 177 tests, at the age of 29 (which is the current age of kohli) Sachin was rated as the second greatest test batsman of all time by wisden, sachin had scored 30+ centuries by the age of 29, Kohli right now is not even the best test batsman of his era, sachin is far far ahead of kohli not just because of runs or matches but because he was a much much bigger player than Kohli in test cricket, Kohli has a lot of work to do if he has to catch up with sachin in test cricket

I don't have cric info and stats up infront of me now but are you suggesting sachin played 177 test by age 29 and virat played not even half of that? But lets assume your number is correct, it took sachin 177 matches to score 30 ish century where as if am not mistaken virat has played around 65-70 test till now and has about 20 century. So it took Sachin 100 more matches to score 10 more century? Considering Virat's form is picking up in test, what do you think would happen after 177 matches?

 

[WildSwing]

I don't have cric info and stats up infront of me now but are you suggesting sachin played 177 test by age 29 and virat played not even half of that? But lets assume your number is correct, it took sachin 177 matches to score 30 ish century where as if am not mistaken virat has played around 65-70 test till now and has about 20 century. So it took Sachin 100 more matches to score 10 more century? Considering Virat's form is picking up in test, what do you think would happen after 177 matches?

No it didn't take sachin 177 test matches to score 30 centuries lol, I was telling you that Sachin managed to keep his average above 57 after such a large sample set where as kohli is struggling to keep his average over 54 even after such a small sample set. At teh same age and after similar no. of tests sachin is far ahead of kohli both in terms of average and centuries, did you even follow sachin's career?

 

[Joseph Gomes]

I don't have cric info and stats up infront of me now but are you suggesting sachin played 177 test by age 29 and virat played not even half of that? But lets assume your number is correct, it took sachin 177 matches to score 30 ish century where as if am not mistaken virat has played around 65-70 test till now and has about 20 century. So it took Sachin 100 more matches to score 10 more century? Considering Virat's form is picking up in test, what do you think would happen after 177 matches?

Sachin had 51 centuries after 177 matches

 

[AMSS]

With an away Test average of 45? Nice joke.

Ponting has an away average of 45. Is Kohli as bad as Ponting? Surely not?

 

[Bewal Express]

Rabada, Hazlewood, Starc, Steyn, Anderson, Broad, Morkel, Boult, Southee as good as the great bowlers of the past. Since 2013 has been the second most difficult phase for batting since the 1990s, this great bowler argument doesn't hold up in test cricket

Statistically yes but they are not. All of these guys are good, but only Steyn out of them is approaching something near greatness. In time Rabada may also be close but the others are good bowlers that are too heavily reliant on conditions to be in their favour.

 

[WildSwing]

Statistically yes but they are not. All of these guys are good, but only Steyn out of them is approaching something near greatness. In time Rabada may also be close but the others are good bowlers that are too heavily reliant on conditions to be in their favour.

This is just your bias speaking up. What makes the bowlers of 80s and 90s better than these current bowlers? The 80s bowlers benefitted from unlimited bouncers and batsmen playing without helmet and other protective gears, whereas the 90s bowlers cashed in big time on the huge tails in all teams. In fact they also benefited a lot from unchecked ball tampering and biased umpiring, the bowlers of this era have it the toughest, they can't tamper with the ball so easily, almost every team has a tail which might but some top orders of the 90s to shame, the batsmen have the best protective gear available and aren't afraid to take on the bowlers. The bowlers of this era are as good as the bowlers of the past, people are blinded by nostalgia

 

[light]

No it didn't take sachin 177 test matches to score 30 centuries lol, I was telling you that Sachin managed to keep his average above 57 after such a large sample set where as kohli is struggling to keep his average over 54 even after such a small sample set. At teh same age and after similar no. of tests sachin is far ahead of kohli both in terms of average and centuries, did you even follow sachin's career?

Am sorry, not a grandpa. I was born in Kholi's era. God blessed me that I wasn't born in Sachin's era. But was able to witness his later part of his carrer where he truley played as a MASTER BATSMEN. The hours of nonsense batting would have killed me to bordem(not talking about Sachin but most batsmen of that era), espacially in this era of T20 batting. In true honestly, I wish TEST CRICKET gets up and retires already. This format of the game has no business in this era. You have to be on welfare to be able to follow a full match of test cricket properly.

Setting tht aside, back to what was being discussed. If you want to play the age game, here is how it should be looked at. Sachin started his test carreer when he was 16 years of age. By the time he reached 29, he played test cricket for 13-14 years. Kohli on the other hand has been around for about 7 years in test cricket. That's almost 2x more years of cricket Sachin played when he reached 29. Now considering during Sachin's era india plays about 3-4 test series each year (let's assume 3 test matches per tour and 3 test series per year). That would lead Sachin to play 3*3*7 = 63 matches. So by age 29, sachin would have played around 120 ish matches, half of what Virat has played. So when you start throwing age around comparasion for average, it doesn't hold up that strongly. Not to mention Virat's 100 converting is getting better. So basically he still averages around 54 if you want to include the matches played in india and your big argument is that Sachin managed to keep 57 around age 29. 3 runs difference, per match. But Sachin retired with an avg of 54 aswell, that means his avg took a nosedive aswell. But you might be right about one thing. There is a very high possibility that Virat may never break Sachin's test records because he most likely will call it a quit in test cricket to save himself for limited overs.

Alright then, if you want to discuss this further might just shoot me a msg. Will be happy to discuss our differences about this subject. No point on filling up a thread with our arguments. LOL

 

[WildSwing]

Am sorry, not a grandpa. I was born in Kholi's era. God blessed me that I wasn't born in Sachin's era. But was able to witness his later part of his carrer where he truley played as a MASTER BATSMEN. The hours of nonsense batting would have killed me to bordem(not talking about Sachin but most batsmen of that era), espacially in this era of T20 batting. In true honestly, I wish TEST CRICKET gets up and retires already. This format of the game has no business in this era. You have to be on welfare to be able to follow a full match of test cricket properly.

Lol so you are a kid, that explains a lot, btw I am the same age as kohli, you don't have to be a grandpa to have watched sachin, it is pointless to discuss the intricacies of test cricket with a kid, I was going to dismantle your arguments but it would be a wasted effort on a kid who doesn't yet have the mental capacity to understand those arguments, I am not trying to insult you, I genuinely mean that you don't understand cricket right now, in few years from now you will be able to appreciate the difference in class between sachin and kohli, till then have fun.

 

[blackanhyellow]

Greatest Indian ODI bat yes.

Greatest Indian ODI/t20 formats combined bat as well.

In tests Sachin, Gavaskar, even Dravid are ahead of him.

 

[Bewal Express]

This is just your bias speaking up. What makes the bowlers of 80s and 90s better than these current bowlers? The 80s bowlers benefitted from unlimited bouncers and batsmen playing without helmet and other protective gears, whereas the 90s bowlers cashed in big time on the huge tails in all teams. In fact they also benefited a lot from unchecked ball tampering and biased umpiring, the bowlers of this era have it the toughest, they can't tamper with the ball so easily, almost every team has a tail which might but some top orders of the 90s to shame, the batsmen have the best protective gear available and aren't afraid to take on the bowlers. The bowlers of this era are as good as the bowlers of the past, people are blinded by nostalgia

Maybe, but when you have watched cricket as long as i have you begin to have context for all bowlers. These bowlers are decent but most of them you mentioned would barely merited more than a few sentences if they played in the previous eras. The biggest difference is that with the influence of T20, bowlers are not the aggressors in test cricket but the batsman, very few in any batsman can bat time. It makes for exciting result orientated cricket but bowlers are not made to work for their wickets. Dont underestimate the impact of DRS on bowling stats and batting techniques.

 

[bujhee kom]

I did request a senior's forum for this exact reason. People who have only watched cricket from 2000 opining on x or y is too much for me. I have watched more cricket here than anyone (maybe bar [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] )
and have seen all the greats.

Sachin was a fine player but those who state he was #2 to Bradman are being blinded by patriotism. Viv Richards is far and away the best player I have ever seen. SRT has none of his on field presence or ability to rip apart any attack.

I urge folks to take ODIs/T20s and Tests are two separate arenas and judge accordingly. There is no such thing as a combined ranking.

 

[babajee]

I did request a senior's forum for this exact reason. People who have only watched cricket from 2000 opining on x or y is too much for me. I have watched more cricket here than anyone (maybe bar [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] )
and have seen all the greats.

Sachin was a fine player but those who state he was #2 to Bradman are being blinded by patriotism. Viv Richards is far and away the best player I have ever seen. SRT has none of his on field presence or ability to rip apart any attack.

I urge folks to take ODIs/T20s and Tests are two separate arenas and judge accordingly. There is no such thing as a combined ranking.

So you have seen Kohli and Sachin. Who is better?

 

[Rahul1]

I did request a senior's forum for this exact reason. People who have only watched cricket from 2000 opining on x or y is too much for me. I have watched more cricket here than anyone (maybe bar [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] )
and have seen all the greats.

Sachin was a fine player but those who state he was #2 to Bradman are being blinded by patriotism. Viv Richards is far and away the best player I have ever seen. SRT has none of his on field presence or ability to rip apart any attack.

I urge folks to take ODIs/T20s and Tests are two separate arenas and judge accordingly. There is no such thing as a combined ranking.

So the likes of Shane Warne, Ricky Ponting, Andy Flower, Matthew Hayden, Brian Lara, Viv Richards himself, and your own Hanif mohammad etc are blinded by Indian patriotism.

Got it.

 

[R3verse Swing]

The best Indian batsman ever is - Sunil Gavaskar.

Every other Indian batsman goes to school on his batting.

 

[R3verse Swing]

I should add, Gavaskar was the FIRST to break 10000 Test Run barrier, and the FIRST to break Bradman's 29 Test Century record. He was knocking the West Indian quartet for fun, WITHOUT a helmet.

You had to see him, to believe him.

 

[Tusker]

I did request a senior's forum for this exact reason. People who have only watched cricket from 2000 opining on x or y is too much for me. I have watched more cricket here than anyone (maybe bar [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] )
and have seen all the greats.

The problem arguing with old era fanatics such as you , Junaids and Robert is that there is no place for facts in these discussions. Nostalgia is the king here. For instance the picture painted by the 3 of you about old era cricket is laughably different from what can be seen on numerous youtube videos from Older era's. (In before the usual jibes about using YT clips to decide)

Here is a challenge for you: Go find me a YT clip that best represents the supposedly glorious ERAs of cricket that are now supposedly "lost" to the world and explain to me in deep technical terms why the piece of action is soo breathtaking that I must change my cricketing know how.

Sachin was a fine player but those who state he was #2 to Bradman are being blinded by patriotism. Viv Richards is far and away the best player I have ever seen. SRT has none of his on field presence or ability to rip apart any attack.

I urge folks to take ODIs/T20s and Tests are two separate arenas and judge accordingly. There is no such thing as a combined ranking.

The last time we discussed Viv Richards you quietly slipped away from the thread when uncomfortable facts were introduced. Nothing different is going to happen now. Let me know if you have the capacity for a proper facts based discussion instead of presenting your views as "facts" and supplementing them with innuendo, trolling and jibes to do the rest.