Kane Williamson is the best Test batsman in recent times

[ndr112ndr]

Kane is a great test batsman no doubt

But his knock in the last test and series shudnt be counted for his superiority as this current Pakistan team is MINNOW LEVEL !!!

 

[Bahnz]

Kohli went back to England and had a great series. Williamson hasn't done that in those three countries (to the best of my recollection).

How can you equate performances in SENA to those in Ind/UAE/SL/BD, when SL/BD are clearly much weaker teams? You said in "AWAY tough conditions", so I don't see how performances against WI/SL/BD come into play here.

Kane hit a fantastic hundred in England in 2015, unfortunately it was only a two test series, so he had limited chances to go on and fill his boots like Kohli did this year. Likewise, Kane's only really played 3 tests in South Africa (I know his statsguru record says 4, but one of those games was rained out after day 1), and 2 of those were back in 2012/13 when he was still developing as a batsman. So you're really only talking one game in SA post 2013 (when he started to consistently start making runs) - and in that game he scored a gutsy 70 while the rest of the NZ batting collapsed around him (last man out, looking to slog some quick runs). He just hasn't had the same opportunities to score runs against the leading nations as Kohli has.

Also it should be noted that because NZ aren't a fashionable side, they always get squeezed into touring during the fringes of the big country's seasons. NZ typically play England in May when batting is at its most difficult, while Kohli has only played at the peak of the English summer, when it's hotter drier and more batsman friendly. Likewise his last series against South Africa was played in August, in the middle of South Africa's winter.

Not saying any of this makes Kane a better batsman, but it's necessary context when comparing stats.

 

[Hitman]

Kane Williamson, average in IND/UAE/SL/BD: 51.31

Kohli's average in SA/ENG/Aus/NZ: 49.88

Thanks for letting us know your knowledge of the game )

And then you later in your post speak about context, right?

Both the players don't average above 40 everywhere in the world. That does not mean they're bad or can't play in those conditions.

Really?

But yes, keep ignoring the context and blindly chant "but but but #7!".

Yes, you're the #7th ranked Test team in the world.

 

[giri26]

Kane Williamson named Player of the Year at annual NZC awards

New Zealand captain Kane Williamson claimed the coveted Sir Richard Hadlee Medal for Men's Player of the Year at the annual New Zealand Cricket awards on Thursday, 21 March.

Williamson also took home the Test Player of the Year award and the Redpath Cup for First-Class Batting. Ross Taylor, Trent Boult and Colin Munro were the others to receive major awards, while teenaged all-rounder Amelia Kerr was a big winner among the women.

Williamson had a hugely successful year across formats, both individually and with the New Zealand team. Under his leadership, New Zealand rose to become the No. 2 side in the MRF Tyres ICC Test Team Rankings. He also enjoyed good form with the bat, scoring 801 Test runs over the season under consideration, at an impressive average of 89

In December 2018, Williamson also became the first New Zealand batsman to breach 900 ratings points in the MRF Tyres ICC Test Batting Rankings, and is only nine points behind the No. 1-ranked Virat Kohli.

Like Williamson, the 18-year-old Kerr also bagged three awards, including the Women’s ODI Player of the Year, Phyl Blackler Cup for women’s domestic bowling, and the Venus Cup for Secondary Schools Female Player of the Year. Kerr enjoyed a tremendous season, scoring 415 runs at an average of 59. She also broke the world record for the highest individual score in women's ODIs, when she smashed 232*, surpassing Belinda Clark's 21-year best of 229.

Taylor, who enjoyed a monstrous 2018 in ODIs, where he averaged 84 for his 759 runs, was named the Men's ODI Player of the Year for the second year in a row

In the T20I format, Sophie Devine once again took the Women's Twenty20 Player of the Year award, while Munro, too, bagged the Men's title like he did last year.

Fast bowler Trent Boult, who received the Richard Hadlee Medal last year, was presented the Windsor Cup for first-class bowling, for his 35 wickets at an average of 24.

Full list of awards:

Sir Richard Hadlee Medal for Player of the Year: Kane Williamson
Test Player of the Year: Kane Williamson
Women’s ODI Player of the Year: Amelia Kerr
Men’s ODI Player of the Year: Ross Taylor
Women’s T20 Player of the Year: Sophie Devine
Men’s T20 Player of the Year: Colin Munro
Women’s Domestic Player of the Year: Natalie Dodd
Men’s Domestic Player of the Year: Devon Conway
Super Smash Women’s Player of the Year: Frankie Mackay
Super Smash Men’s Player of the Year: Tom Bruce
The Redpath Cup for First-Class batting: Kane Williamson
The Windsor Cup for First-Class bowling: Trent Boult
The Phyl Blackler Cup for women’s domestic bowling: Amelia Kerr
The Ruth Martin Cup for women’s domestic batting: Natalie Dodd
New Zealand Umpire of the Year: Chris Brown
Venus Cup Player of the Year: Amelia Kerr (Tawa College)

 

[Hawkeye]

Kane proving how amazing he is.

Easily the most underrated Test batsman .

 

[Ab Fan]

He is a brilliant test player and closest to someone whom we can term as a no. 3 batsmen.

However, he isn't seen as someone who has got the mountain of runs in his career like smith and Kohli have got till now.

However, I can certainly associate him with someone like say, Rahul Dravid, across both the formats of the game.

 

[barah_admi]

Kane Williamson is only underrated or under appreciated by those whose view of cricket is India and nothing else.

True cricket fans understand just how good he is, and in my opinion, he is the best test batsman of his generation (loosely those who debuted circa 2010), a claim I have repeated several times. He is the best player of spin, caresses the ball rather than powering it and plays in crisis situations and is the best number three...in fact, the only great number three since Younis Khan and Ricky Ponting.

Williamson was made in the fire, his 113 against India the first signs of his genius, then his remarkable 132 at Lord's and his piece de resistance (thus far), 139 against Pakistan. All but 2 of his test centuries have come at one down, some of his best work has come when NZ have been 2 or 3 down for not many.

The media is obsessed with a couple of names, yet all those supposedly great names are playing catch up with Williamson in the test arena.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Kane Williamson is only underrated or under appreciated by those whose view of cricket is India and nothing else.

How ignorant.

Kane Williamson is highly respected by Indian fans. Just stating the BIG FAT FACT that Kohli is ahead of him in all formats does not make Indian fans untrue fans of cricket lol whatever that means.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

As far as test matches are concerned
Smith
Kohli.. Kane

Root.

Kane is not underrated, he is acknowledged as a great test batsman. He is part of the fab 4,but the fact is that kane is mediocre in other formats while kohli is a champion batsman in all formats.
Kane does not possess shot making abilities which is why he is not as celebrated as other fab 4 batsmen.

 

[Hitman]

Kane proving how amazing he is.

Easily the most underrated Test batsman .

Were you expecting any other NZ batsman to win the honor of being their best Test batsman last year?

 

[Hitman]

How ignorant.

Kane Williamson is highly respected by Indian fans. Just stating the BIG FAT FACT that Kohli is ahead of him in all formats does not make Indian fans untrue fans of cricket lol whatever that means.

I guess 99% of Pak posters on PP who rate Kohli a better Test batsman than Kane suffer from the same disease as us Indian fans

 

[Bilal7]

Kane has been the best test batsman in the world since Smith retired. Will go down as one of the all-time greats. Don't sleep on him at the WC either.

 

[Darkrai]

Not too long ago many considered Root as a better batsman than Kane. Times have changed, Root has been left behind by Kane and Kohli.

For now, Smith>Kohli>Kane.

 

[Hitman]

Such a shame that the ICC has buckled under the pressure of the BCCI and has constantly rated Kohli as the best Test batsman in the world for quite a while now. I wish the ICC rankings were impartial.

 

[Hitman]

Not too long ago many considered Root as a better batsman than Kane. Times have changed, Root has been left behind by Kane and Kohli.

For now, Smith>Kohli>Kane.

Yea, just 1 innings in Sri Lanka back then made Root the best batsman in the world

But since then Kane has once again snatched the throne from Root after his performance against Sri Lanka at home.

 

[Bilal7]

Such a shame that the ICC has buckled under the pressure of the BCCI and has constantly rated Kohli as the best Test batsman in the world for quite a while now. I wish the ICC rankings were impartial.

Too bad the BCCI's pressure couldn't make the ICC give a higher all-time rating to Sachin Tendulker. Yousuf > Sachin

 

[Hasan123]

Kane Williamson is not underrated . FGS why do people always say this ? He is rated as 1 of the top 3 batters in the world and already considered 1 of NZs greatest batsmen at the age of 28! How much more rating does he need ?

Personally I think Kohli is a better batsmen but that doesn't make Kane a bad player at all.

 

[Hawkeye]

As far as test matches are concerned
Smith
Kohli.. Kane

Root.

Kane is not underrated, he is acknowledged as a great test batsman. He is part of the fab 4,but the fact is that kane is mediocre in other formats while kohli is a champion batsman in all formats.
Kane does not possess shot making abilities which is why he is not as celebrated as other fab 4 batsmen.

If you're saying Kohli/Kane are equal in Tests, then yes that's true.

Were you expecting any other NZ batsman to win the honor of being their best Test batsman last year?

Not talking about NZ awards only.

 

[Hitman]

Too bad the BCCI's pressure couldn't make the ICC give a higher all-time rating to Sachin Tendulker. Yousuf > Sachin

Such a shame that the Kohli and Kane are going head to head at their peak, and the rankings are a reflection on who is ahead. Also, such a shame that Yousuf reached his peak in 2006, a peak that was achieved by 1 year of performance.

Context isn't a world that a lot of people apply these days.

 

[Hitman]

Not talking about NZ awards only.

Then what awards were you speaking of when you specifically quoted that particular post?

 

[Ab Fan]

Tests: -

Smith
Kohli
Kane
Root

ODIs: -

Kohli
_____
Root
______
Williamson/Smith

That should end the discussion.

 

[The Viper]

Kane needs to improve his performances in SA, India and England if he wants to be better than Kohli. I am sure he will score in those places when he next tours though.

 

[Bilal7]

Such a shame that the Kohli and Kane are going head to head at their peak, and the rankings are a reflection on who is ahead. Also, such a shame that Yousuf reached his peak in 2006, a peak that was achieved by 1 year of performance.

Context isn't a world that a lot of people apply these days.

As long as you use the same logic when comparing Sachin to Yousuf that you use when comparing Kohli to Kane, you won't reek of hypocrisy.

A player's peak rating tells you how good they were at their best. Sachin at his peak wasn't very good. A shame the BCCI did not have a lot of power when Sachin was at his (unimpressive) best.

 

[Sachin136]

As long as you use the same logic when comparing Sachin to Yousuf that you use when comparing Kohli to Kane, you won't reek of hypocrisy.

A player's peak rating tells you how good they were at their best. Sachin at his peak wasn't very good. A shame the BCCI did not have a lot of power when Sachin was at his (unimpressive) best.

Do you not see the difference between their current rating and their peak ratings? Peak ratings are meaningless because you can have a couple of easy series in a row or a spike in form and suddenly get a very high rating. Though you might not be able to sustain it. But Kohli has been ranked ahead of Williamson for a while now.

After the year Kohli had touring SA and England, it is quite ridiculous for anyone to think that Williamson is even close to him at the moment.

Sachin at his peak wasn't very good, even though he averaged 60 away from home for a decade?

 

[Bilal7]

Do you not see the difference between their current rating and their peak ratings? Peak ratings are meaningless because you can have a couple of easy series in a row or a spike in form and suddenly get a very high rating. Though you might not be able to sustain it. But Kohli has been ranked ahead of Williamson for a while now.

After the year Kohli had touring SA and England, it is quite ridiculous for anyone to think that Williamson is even close to him at the moment.

Sachin at his peak wasn't very good, even though he averaged 60 away from home for a decade?

Yes, of course. The same source becomes the holy grail or utterly useless depending on your agenda. The peak ratings are not based on a couple of series, they take into account the same period of time that current ratings do. Similarly, opponents and home and away series are handled the same way. It's the same algorithm, lol.

Sachin at his peak was fantastic in my opinion but I also currently rate Kane higher than Kohli. This is because I understand the limitations of the ICC rankings/ratings and the fact that they are not the be all, end all of cricket discussion.

 

[Hasan123]

Yes, of course. The same source becomes the holy grail or utterly useless depending on your agenda. The peak ratings are not based on a couple of series, they take into account the same period of time that current ratings do. Similarly, opponents and home and away series are handled the same way. It's the same algorithm, lol.

Sachin at his peak was fantastic in my opinion but I also currently rate Kane higher than Kohli. This is because I understand the limitations of the ICC rankings/ratings and the fact that they are not the be all, end all of cricket discussion.

You literally just said his peak wasn’t good, then when presented his average of 60 you changed your tune ) ) . [MENTION=147314]topspin[/MENTION] [MENTION=133315]Hitman[/MENTION].

Surprised you didn’t say an average of 60 isn’t very good ) )

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

Yes, of course. The same source becomes the holy grail or utterly useless depending on your agenda. The peak ratings are not based on a couple of series, they take into account the same period of time that current ratings do. Similarly, opponents and home and away series are handled the same way. It's the same algorithm, lol.

Sachin at his peak was fantastic in my opinion but I also currently rate Kane higher than Kohli. This is because I understand the limitations of the ICC rankings/ratings and the fact that they are not the be all, end all of cricket discussion.

You once rated batsmen on their ability to play in away conditions.
Now since Kohli has bossed it ,you stopped using that filter.
As far as stats are concerned ,kane avgs 2o in SA,30 ine eng,35 in srilanka,kohli has a superior away record and he also won a much important test series than kane ever did.

 

[Hitman]

You literally just said his peak wasn’t good, then when presented his average of 60 you changed your tune ) ) . [MENTION=147314]topspin[/MENTION] [MENTION=133315]Hitman[/MENTION].

Surprised you didn’t say an average of 60 isn’t very good ) )

From saying that his peak was unimpressive, the narrative changed the moment when his average of 60 was brought up

 

[Hitman]

Yes, of course. The same source becomes the holy grail or utterly useless depending on your agenda. The peak ratings are not based on a couple of series, they take into account the same period of time that current ratings do. Similarly, opponents and home and away series are handled the same way. It's the same algorithm, lol.

Sachin at his peak was fantastic in my opinion but I also currently rate Kane higher than Kohli. This is because I understand the limitations of the ICC rankings/ratings and the fact that they are not the be all, end all of cricket discussion.

You also rated a batsman with a Test average of 46.64 the best Test batsman of his era, a chucker as the best spinner of his era, Babar Azam a better ODI batsman than Kohli, and then many other things. Things that has made you a complete butt of jokes in this site.

No wonder you suffer from Kohli phobia. First Amla was better, then when he was knocked off suddenly Babar was better, and now suddenly Kane is better .... all of that despite the fact that Kohli has been the #1 Test and ODI batsman for a long, long time now

 

[Hasan123]

From saying that his peak was unimpressive, the narrative changed the moment when his average of 60 was brought up

I'm shocked he didn't say that an average of 60 wasn't good. He said during the England tour that Kohli 150 was meangliness and he needed to get 200 even though Indian batters kept getting out . Kohli literally carried the tailenders.

How biased can someone get ?

 

[Hitman]

I'm shocked he didn't say that an average of 60 wasn't good. He said during the England tour that Kohli 150 was meangliness and he needed to get 200 even though Indian batters kept getting out . Kohli literally carried the tailenders.

How biased can someone get ?

All it does is make that person an object of ridicule. Some people just don't learn when to stop.

 

[Bilal7]

You once rated batsmen on their ability to play in away conditions.
Now since Kohli has bossed it ,you stopped using that filter.
As far as stats are concerned ,kane avgs 2o in SA,30 ine eng,35 in srilanka,kohli has a superior away record and he also won a much important test series than kane ever did.

Kohli has done well overseas so there is no reason to criticize him on that account any more. He has certainly improved and I always maintained that he could.

When did Kane last play those matches? If you're considering their entire careers at this point, then Kohli is definitely ahead and someone like Smith is #1. However, I was comparing them on current form and ability and in the absence of Smith, Kane is #1.

You literally just said his peak wasn’t good, then when presented his average of 60 you changed your tune ) ) . [MENTION=147314]topspin[/MENTION] [MENTION=133315]Hitman[/MENTION].

Surprised you didn’t say an average of 60 isn’t very good ) )

From saying that his peak was unimpressive, the narrative changed the moment when his average of 60 was brought up

It is no surprise that my argument has gone over your head. Let me make it easier for you two to understand.

One of you claimed that Kohli is a better test batsman than Kane because the ICC ratings algorithm says so. I therefore brought up the unfortunate and completely inconvenient fact of Sachin's highest ever rating being lower than the rating of Mohammad Yousuf. This does not reflect my personal opinion of Sachin or Yousuf's peak, it was simply to point out the hypocrisy in our resident Sachin and Kohli worshippers.

So either you accept that the ICC rankings are not everything or you accept that Yousuf at his best was a better batsman than Sachin. Or you can dance around the question and try to derail this topic as usual, because your hypocrisy has been pointed out.

Also, Hasan123, you should really start reading more carefully.

You also rated a batsman with a Test average of 46.64 the best Test batsman of his era, a chucker as the best spinner of his era, Babar Azam a better ODI batsman than Kohli, and then many other things. Things that has made you a complete butt of jokes in this site.

No wonder you suffer from Kohli phobia. First Amla was better, then when he was knocked off suddenly Babar was better, and now suddenly Kane is better .... all of that despite the fact that Kohli has been the #1 Test and ODI batsman for a long, long time now

Says someone who has posted on here while being literally drunk. No need to get personal and no need to lie about my opinions on cricket. Hashim Amla is the best test batsman of his generation and Saeed Ajmal the best ODI bowler of his, however I have never claimed that Babar is a better ODI batsman than Kohli. However, Babar is better than Kohli was at the same age. There is a subtle but crucial difference between these two statements that anyone with a clear mind can see.

 

[Hasan123]

Kohli has done well overseas so there is no reason to criticize him on that account any more. He has certainly improved and I always maintained that he could.

When did Kane last play those matches? If you're considering their entire careers at this point, then Kohli is definitely ahead and someone like Smith is #1. However, I was comparing them on current form and ability and in the absence of Smith, Kane is #1.





It is no surprise that my argument has gone over your head. Let me make it easier for you two to understand.

One of you claimed that Kohli is a better test batsman than Kane because the ICC ratings algorithm says so. I therefore brought up the unfortunate and completely inconvenient fact of Sachin's highest ever rating being lower than the rating of Mohammad Yousuf. This does not reflect my personal opinion of Sachin or Yousuf's peak, it was simply to point out the hypocrisy in our resident Sachin and Kohli worshippers.

So either you accept that the ICC rankings are not everything or you accept that Yousuf at his best was a better batsman than Sachin. Or you can dance around the question and try to derail this topic as usual, because your hypocrisy has been pointed out.

Also, Hasan123, you should really start reading more carefully.



Says someone who has posted on here while being literally drunk. No need to get personal and no need to lie about my opinions on cricket. Hashim Amla is the best test batsman of his generation and Saeed Ajmal the best ODI bowler of his, however I have never claimed that Babar is a better ODI batsman than Kohli. However, Babar is better than Kohli was at the same age. There is a subtle but crucial difference between these two statements that anyone with a clear mind can see.

I don't need to read carefully. Everyone has just seen how you changed your mind after being presented with stats.

 

[Bilal7]

I don't need to read carefully. Everyone has just seen how you changed your mind after being presented with stats.

If that is what you figured out from my posts above, you definitely require ESL classes.

"As long as you use the same logic when comparing Sachin to Yousuf that you use when comparing Kohli to Kane, you won't reek of hypocrisy".

I was baiting and mocking Sachin worshippers like Hitman but of course, you went ahead and got caught yourself.

 

[Hasan123]

If that is what you figured out from my posts above, you definitely require ESL classes.

"As long as you use the same logic when comparing Sachin to Yousuf that you use when comparing Kohli to Kane, you won't reek of hypocrisy".

I was baiting and mocking Sachin worshippers like Hitman but of course, you went ahead and got caught yourself.

I am not talking about those comments of Sachin and Yousuf.

You said Sachin peak wasn't very good. When someone responded with his average your response was his peak was very good. You can see it above.

You know yourself you were exposed and you actually think I care about your trolling of Sachin ? )

 

[Hasan123]

If that is what you figured out from my posts above, you definitely require ESL classes.

"As long as you use the same logic when comparing Sachin to Yousuf that you use when comparing Kohli to Kane, you won't reek of hypocrisy".

I was baiting and mocking Sachin worshippers like Hitman but of course, you went ahead and got caught yourself.

You need to read carefully yourself. Look at my quotes to Hitman and you can see what I was talking about) .

 

[Bilal7]

I am not talking about those comments of Sachin and Yousuf.

You said Sachin peak wasn't very good. When someone responded with his average your response was his peak was very good. You can see it above.

You know yourself you were exposed and you actually think I care about your trolling of Sachin ? )

Like I said, my comments were mocking Hitman and him treating the ICC rankings like the be all, end all of cricket discussions. When the best authority on myself is letting you know that I rate Sachin's peak higher than the ICC does, you don't really have a leg to stand on.

Regardless, stop derailing the thread and take your comprehension fails somewhere else.

 

[Hitman]

Says someone who has posted on here while being literally drunk.

Yes, I have posted here while being intoxicated in the past. But at least I'm honest about it unlike you whose hobby is embarrassing himself with his laughable opinions. Why do you think so many Pak posters ridicule and make fun of you? Are they under my payroll. Even Hasan123 is a Pakistani poster.

No need to get personal and no need to lie about my opinions on cricket. Hashim Amla is the best test batsman of his generation and Saeed Ajmal the best ODI bowler of his, however I have never claimed that Babar is a better ODI batsman than Kohli.

Yes, sure. That was exactly what I was speaking of. Thanks for admitting it with your own two lips. Such a shame that the standard of cricket has come down so low that a batsman averaging 46.64 is the best Test batsman of his generation, and a chucker was the best spinner of his era. I guess there were no other legitimate spinners during his time, that must be the reason.

And yes, you did claim Babar to be a better ODI batsman than Kohli before his epic flop in the ODI series against New Zealand. There are plenty of posters who still make fun of you regarding those posts. Unless they are under my payroll.

 

[Hasan123]

Like I said, my comments were mocking Hitman and him treating the ICC rankings like the be all, end all of cricket discussions. When the best authority on myself is letting you know that I rate Sachin's peak higher than the ICC does, you don't really have a leg to stand on.

Regardless, stop derailing the thread and take your comprehension fails somewhere else.

You changed your mind you knew the stats. It's clear to see. There is no issue with my comprehension. You have embarrassed yourself yet again.

Kohli is better than Kane. End of thread. The only reason you think Kane is better due to his nationality. Kohli averages more than Kane in South Africa and England. You claim to rate all condition batters highly yet you rate Kane higher even though Kohli outperforms him in 2 of the more difficult batting conditions.

Your hypocrisy is exposed again. Time for you to go into hiding now.

 

[Bilal7]

You changed your mind you knew the stats. It's clear to see. There is no issue with my comprehension. You have embarrassed yourself yet again.

Kohli is better than Kane. End of thread. The only reason you think Kane is better due to his nationality. Kohli averages more than Kane in South Africa and England. You claim to rate all condition batters highly yet you rate Kane higher even though Kohli outperforms him in 2 of the more difficult batting conditions.

Your hypocrisy is exposed again. Time for you to go into hiding now.

Yes, end of thread because someone who probably has a tattoo of Kohli's face has said that Kohli is better than Kane.

Kane averages over 70 over the last 12 months, which is roughly the period of time that Steven Smith the cheat was banned for. Kohli averages around 50 during the same period. This shows that currently, Kane is the #1 batsman in the world.

If you want to compare test batsmen over the last five or last ten years, then neither Kohli nor Kane can be positioned as the best in the world. However, Kohli has been better than Kane overall, given the fact that he's done much better than Kane in South Africa and England.

Yes, I have posted here while being intoxicated in the past. But at least I'm honest about it unlike you whose hobby is embarrassing himself with his laughable opinions. Why do you think so many Pak posters ridicule and make fun of you? Are they under my payroll. Even Hasan123 is a Pakistani poster.




Yes, sure. That was exactly what I was speaking of. Thanks for admitting it with your own two lips. Such a shame that the standard of cricket has come down so low that a batsman averaging 46.64 is the best Test batsman of his generation, and a chucker was the best spinner of his era. I guess there were no other legitimate spinners during his time, that must be the reason.

And yes, you did claim Babar to be a better ODI batsman than Kohli before his epic flop in the ODI series against New Zealand. There are plenty of posters who still make fun of you regarding those posts. Unless they are under my payroll.

Well, you seem to be drunk right now as well. I advise you to get off Pakpassion because you're ranting about a bunch of different things that have nothing to do with this thread. I know what I said and I stand by the things I say. However, I don't appreciate people misquoting me. Babar is definitely a better batsman than Kohli was at the same age.

I only see you and Hasan failing at comprehension here. And no, I don't think someone like you would be able to have anyone on his payroll.

 

[Hitman]

Well, you seem to be drunk right now as well. I advise you to get off Pakpassion because you're ranting about a bunch of different things that have nothing to do with this thread. I know what I said and I stand by the things I say. However, I don't appreciate people misquoting me. Babar is definitely a better batsman than Kohli was at the same age.

I only see you and Hasan failing at comprehension here. And no, I don't think someone like you would be able to have anyone on his payroll.

And that is precisely the reason why you are the butt of jokes among so many Pakistani posters on this site. I'll ignore the rest of your trash/garbage (post) though.

 

[Mamoon]

This like Tendulkar all over again. The mentally gymnastics and the excuses will never end, and people will go to any lengths to make other inferior batsmen look better than him.

He gave our fans stomach ache for two decades, and now Kohli is following suit.

People need to make peace with the fact that he is the greatest batsman in the world by a mile and a bonafide all-time great with many years left. In fact, he has every chance of ending up as one of the top 3 batsmen of all time.

As great as a player as Williamson is, he is nowhere near Kohli. This era will be remembered for Kohli and not for Williamson or any other batsman.

 

[Bilal7]

And that is precisely the reason why you are the butt of jokes among so many Pakistani posters on this site. I'll ignore the rest of your trash/garbage (post) though.

Yes, of course. Please ignore the fact that Kane averages 20 points higher than Kohli does over the last year, when the title for best test batsman in the world was between these two. That is clearly not relevant to this thread but Hashim Amla certainly is.

 

[Hitman]

This like Tendulkar all over again. The mentally gymnastics and the excuses will never end, and people will go to any lengths to make other inferior batsmen look better than him.

He gave our fans stomach ache for two decades, and now Kohli is following suit.

People need to make peace with the fact that he is the greatest batsman in the world by a mile and a bonafide all-time great with many years left. In fact, he has every chance of ending up as one of the top 3 batsmen of all time.

As great as a player as Williamson is, he is nowhere near Kohli. This era will be remembered for Kohli and not for Williamson or any other batsman.

Couldn't have put it better.

 

[Hasan123]

Yes, end of thread because someone who probably has a tattoo of Kohli's face has said that Kohli is better than Kane.

Kane averages over 70 over the last 12 months, which is roughly the period of time that Steven Smith the cheat was banned for. Kohli averages around 50 during the same period. This shows that currently, Kane is the #1 batsman in the world.

If you want to compare test batsmen over the last five or last ten years, then neither Kohli nor Kane can be positioned as the best in the world. However, Kohli has been better than Kane overall, given the fact that he's done much better than Kane in South Africa and England.



Well, you seem to be drunk right now as well. I advise you to get off Pakpassion because you're ranting about a bunch of different things that have nothing to do with this thread. I know what I said and I stand by the things I say. However, I don't appreciate people misquoting me. Babar is definitely a better batsman than Kohli was at the same age.

I only see you and Hasan failing at comprehension here. And no, I don't think someone like you would be able to have anyone on his payroll.

Kohli is 1 of my favourite players I won’t lie . But it’s clear he is the best batter in the world.


I don’t care about Williamson average. Kohli scared against South Africa and England who are better than Sri Lanka and Pakistan. Stop shifting goal posts, this isn’t about the last 5 years. This is about the present. Any objective person can see Kohli is better than Kane.

 

[Hitman]

Yes, of course. Please ignore the fact that Kane averages 20 points higher than Kohli does over the last year, when the title for best test batsman in the world was between these two. That is clearly not relevant to this thread but Hashim Amla certainly is.

The tag of the best batsman in the world is not judged by the last year. If it did, Yousuf would have been hailed the best batsman in the world immediately after 2006. Guess what? He never was hailed as such.

The tag of the best batsman in the world belongs to the player who has dominated over the last 3 years at least.

Or else every batsman who did the best in a year would be hailed as the best batsman in the world after that year

 

[Hitman]

Kohli is 1 of my favourite players I won’t lie . But it’s clear he is the best batter in the world.


I don’t care about Williamson average. Kohli scared against South Africa and England who are better than Sri Lanka and Pakistan. Stop shifting goal posts, this isn’t about the last 5 years. This is about the present. Any objective person can see Kohli is better than Kane.

Objective is the key word here.

 

[Hasan123]

Objective is the key word here.

Claims to respect all conditions batters, Williamson averages lower in SA and has never had a series in England like Kohli did last year. Still says Williamson is better.

Bilal7 summed up.

 

[Hitman]

Claims to respect all conditions batters, Williamson averages lower in SA and has never had a series in England like Kohli did last year. Still says Williamson is better.

Bilal7 summed up.

Prior to that, he cared only for performances away from home

 

[Ab Fan]

Yes, of course. Please ignore the fact that Kane averages 20 points higher than Kohli does over the last year, when the title for best test batsman in the world was between these two. That is clearly not relevant to this thread but Hashim Amla certainly is.

I am sorry but just came to respond here: -

As you are talking about recent performance, I understand its closer as Kane after a slight bad patch, is averaging 62 in 2017 and 59 in 2018. But in contrast, Kohli also averages 75 in 2017 and 55 in 2018 but also with higher no. of matches and much more runs in that particular year. It is only in 2019 that Kane played two tests vs BD, got a 200* and hence is averaging 274 in 2019.

So, even if we talk about recent performance, Kohli has a stronger case than Kane as he just came out with those numbers in 2018 after completing a series vs SA, Eng and Australia.

But when we take overall career picture into consideration, it is quite apparent that Kohli with an average of 40+ pretty much everywhere except England beats Kane who has an average under 40 in three prominent countries, i.e, India, South Africa and England.

 

[Bilal7]

Kohli is 1 of my favourite players I won’t lie . But it’s clear he is the best batter in the world.


I don’t care about Williamson average. Kohli scared against South Africa and England who are better than Sri Lanka and Pakistan. Stop shifting goal posts, this isn’t about the last 5 years. This is about the present. Any objective person can see Kohli is better than Kane.

Yes, of course you don't care about the fact that Kane has been averaging over 70 over the last year. It does not fit your narrative.

I guess Smith is the best batsman in the world currently, because of what he did two years ago...

(Since I don't rate your comprehension: I'm being sarcastic about Smith).

The tag of the best batsman in the world is not judged by the last year. If it did, Yousuf would have been hailed the best batsman in the world immediately after 2006. Guess what? He never was hailed as such.

The tag of the best batsman in the world belongs to the player who has dominated over the last 3 years at least.

Or else every batsman who did the best in a year would be hailed as the best batsman in the world after that year

Yousuf was the world's best test batsman in 2006. What happened three years ago has no bearing when talking about the present.

Did you even bother to read the OP? Like I said, if you want to talk about the last three or five or ten years, Kane isn't the best bat in the world but then again, neither is Kohli.

 

[Hasan123]

Prior to that, he cared only for performances away from home

Watch him come back and change his mind.

Apparently saying Kohli is a better batter than Williamson means you have a Kohli tattoo. Obviously need to result to personal insults when your arguments are blown up. Notice how he didn’t respond to that point about Kohli averaging more than Williamson in SA and that England series. He started talking about the last 5 years . )

 

[Hasan123]

Yes, of course you don't care about the fact that Kane has been averaging over 70 over the last year. It does not fit your narrative.

I guess Smith is the best batsman in the world currently, because of what he did two years ago...

(Since I don't rate your comprehension: I'm being sarcastic about Smith).



Yousuf was the world's best test batsman in 2006. What happened three years ago has no bearing when talking about the present.

Did you even bother to read the OP? Like I said, if you want to talk about the last three or five or ten years, Kane isn't the best bat in the world but then again, neither is Kohli.

Williamson scored these runs against average test teams. Kohli scored in difficult conditions in England and South Africa. Williamson has struggled in those countries and away in India as well. Overall Kohli is better than him in tests.

 

[Bilal7]

Claims to respect all conditions batters, Williamson averages lower in SA and has never had a series in England like Kohli did last year. Still says Williamson is better.

Bilal7 summed up.

This thread is about current form and you are still whining about what happened years ago.

I am sorry but just came to respond here: -

As you are talking about recent performance, I understand its closer as Kane after a slight bad patch, is averaging 62 in 2017 and 59 in 2018. But in contrast, Kohli also averages 75 in 2017 and 55 in 2018 but also with higher no. of matches and much more runs in that particular year. It is only in 2019 that Kane played two tests vs BD, got a 200* and hence is averaging 274 in 2019.

So, even if we talk about recent performance, Kohli has a stronger case than Kane as he just came out with those numbers in 2018 after completing a series vs SA, Eng and Australia.

But when we take overall career picture into consideration, it is quite apparent that Kohli with an average of 40+ pretty much everywhere except England beats Kane who has an average under 40 in three prominent countries, i.e, India, South Africa and England.

I believe Smith is a better batsman than both and the best test batsman of the latter part of the current decade.

However, Kane, Kohli and Root haven't been far behind and when Smith the cheat got banned for a year, the stage was set for one of these three to take over the crown. As it happened, Kane averaged over 70 over the last 12 months and Kohli have averaged much lower.

I don't deny that Kohli has a good claim to being the best, post-Smith. However, I will personally give it to Kane. Overall, of course Kohli is the better test batsman.

 

[Hasan123]

This thread is about current form and you are still whining about what happened years ago.



I believe Smith is a better batsman than both and the best test batsman of the latter part of the current decade.

However, Kane, Kohli and Root haven't been far behind and when Smith the cheat got banned for a year, the stage was set for one of these three to take over the crown. As it happened, Kane averaged over 70 over the last 12 months and Kohli have averaged much lower.

I don't deny that Kohli has a good claim to being the best, post-Smith. However, I will personally give it to Kane. Overall, of course Kohli is the better test batsman.

As soon as you are exposed, you run to talking about derailing the thread.

 

[Bilal7]

Williamson scored these runs against average test teams. Kohli scored in difficult conditions in England and South Africa. Williamson has struggled in those countries and away in India as well. Overall Kohli is better than him in tests.

The South Africa-India series did not occur in the last 12 months. The Australia-India series did however.

Listen, dude. Ask anyone around to help you understand this statement: Kane is a better batsman than Kohli currently.

 

[Bilal7]

As soon as you are exposed, you run to talking about derailing the thread.

I'm exposed because you did not bother to read the opening post of this thread. Okay.

 

[jeeteshssaxena]

I'm exposed because you did not bother to read the opening post of this thread. Okay.

Your point about kane avg 70 is legit but note that he bashed bangladesh also while kohli played against top 3 bowling attacks of the world.
We can't say that kane is better only by looking at his avg, context of the innings combined with other factors matter too.

So if we consider the strength of opposition kohli is still ahead or atleast on par with williamson

 

[Mamoon]

It is amazing how he gets away with a mediocre record in almost every major country. He is lucky he doesn’t play for India or England because he would have been bashed like no tomorrow on PP.

His good guy image and the low profile of his team makes it difficult for people to criticize him.

Definitely the weakest Test player among the so-called Fab Four. Someone like Babar and Labuschagne can be easily better than him.

I can only laugh at some people who consider him a better Test batsman than Kohli. He is not even fit to tie Kohli’s shoelaces in any format. They are at completely different levels.

 

[Aman]

It is amazing how he gets away with a mediocre record in almost every major country. He is lucky he doesn’t play for India or England because he would have been bashed like no tomorrow on PP.

His good guy image and the low profile of his team makes it difficult for people to criticize him.

Definitely the weakest Test player among the so-called Fab Four. Someone like Babar and Labuschagne can be easily better than him.

I can only laugh at some people who consider him a better Test batsman than Kohli. He is not even fit to tie Kohli’s shoelaces in any format. They are at completely different levels.

I'm in the same boat, incredibly frustrating to hear him get all the hype when he never performs. Taylor, Latham, Watling and CdG are more important than him these days.

 

[Mamoon]

I'm in the same boat, incredibly frustrating to hear him get all the hype when he never performs. Taylor, Latham, Watling and CdG are more important than him these days.

He scores more soft runs than all of them which boosts his numbers. He would fail against quality attacks and then compensate with a big 200 against Sri Lanka or Pakistan, while someone like Taylor doesn’t score enough runs against weak attacks.

 

[Abdullah719]

His best away series have been against the weaker sides, barring the 2015/16 tour of Australia - That was the same series where Warner, Taylor hit double tons. Starc was the only bowler to average under 30 in that series.

 

[tyron_woodley]

Kane is a cannon fodder amongst the top tier batsmen.

smith kohli almost equal. Slight edge to smithy but I believe kohli will trump him in the next series.

then big gap

root

pujara

babar

kane

yes pujara is better than Kane. get over it.

 

[shah_1]

He averages 44 without the help of Sri Lanka, Bangaldesh and Zimbabwe bowlers

No where near Smith or Kohli

 

[Aman]

I was telling you this for months, and I was called a troll.

Stop marketing him as something he's not or you'll see push back.

Kane has not been good this year, selectors should consider giving him a break for the Indian series and try Will Young.

 

[Aman]

He scores more soft runs than all of them which boosts his numbers. He would fail against quality attacks and then compensate with a big 200 against Sri Lanka or Pakistan, while someone like Taylor doesn’t score enough runs against weak attacks.

This is why I like Taylor, CdG and Watling a lot more than him.

Even CdG has some tough/clutch runs for us.

 

[Aman]

Kane is a cannon fodder amongst the top tier batsmen.

smith kohli almost equal. Slight edge to smithy but I believe kohli will trump him in the next series.

then big gap

root

pujara

babar

kane

yes pujara is better than Kane. get over it.

Kane isn't even NZ's second best batsmen so how is he in this list?

 

[Space Cat]

He hasnt been the same lately away from home in any format. He should step away from playing in these t20 leagues for a few years he is overworked.

 

[Aman]

He hasnt been the same lately away from home in any format. He should step away from playing in these t20 leagues for a few years he is overworked.

Kane is great for NZ standards, but the hype is excessive. It's abundantly clear he's not a superstar player or a fraction of what the cricket media portray him as. We're never going to win anything meaningful with him, he's just not that guy and that's fine. As someone that has realized it after buying into the media hype, it hurts and all the hoopla is incredibly irritating.

 

[Aman]

The likes of Kohli, Smith and Stokes are generational players/ATG players who are serial winners who have won major honors for their country.

 

[cricketjoshila]

He hasnt been the same lately away from home in any format. He should step away from playing in these t20 leagues for a few years he is overworked.

Look who the cat dragged in.Literally.

 

[Space Cat]

Look who the cat dragged in.Literally.

Must be a strong cat to drag in such pure gold.

 

[jnaveen1980]

He has picked up some bad habits he is unable to get rid of. Normally a very calculative player.

 

[Joseph Gomes]

Williamson is the most overhyped player of this decade. Huge statpadder as well.

 

[Ab Fan]

He has been out of form post the WC but his match/series winning inning vs Pakistan was a really high quality one in UAE. He will come good and get back to prolific runs making sooner.

However, it's not too hard to understand that both Root and Kane are nothing more than country greats and will be forgettable sooner after they retire from international cricket.

Only Kohli, Smith, Steyn, AB and Stokes are the ones that will be remembered for a longer time in cricket history, particularly the first three.

 

[aloo paratha]

His best away series have been against the weaker sides, barring the 2015/16 tour of Australia - That was the same series where Warner, Taylor hit double tons. Starc was the only bowler to average under 30 in that series.

Neutral stats (UAE) aren't taken into account here?

 

[Hasan123]

He escapes a lot of criticism for failing in the major test playing nation. Just because he is a good guy it shouldn’t take away the fact he has been mostly poor in the major test playing nation’s countries.

 

[Abdullah719]

Neutral stats (UAE) aren't taken into account here?

I forgot to include those. He has always done well there.

 

[LegendAli]

oh WOW Williamson has really lost the plot these days, yet another failure.

 

[Aman]

He looks pretty washed atm.

Should be given some time off and see if he still wants to play because he certainly doesn't look like he does when he gets out there to bat.

Seems depressed, idk if it's a tough series, burden, fatigue or if the WC Final is hanging over him.