Rohit Sharma vs Inzamam-ul-Haq - Who is the better batter in ODIs and Tests combined?

[worldlife92]

Yes, Rohit is an opener and Inzi played number 3-4 but then people also compare Sachin vs Kohli.
Who is a better batsman according to you?

 

[Swashbuckler]

No comparison, Inzi is much much greater than Rohit in tests, also better in ODIs. Only in WCs and on rank turners does Rohit have some standard. On all other counts Inzi is untouchable.

ODI batting is so easy today, especially for top 3. That clouds people's judgement.

 

[Mesozoic]

Inzi.


Just in ODIs? It's Rohit.

 

[Mesozoic]

people also compare Sachin vs Kohli.

Sachin and Kohli both played at the same position in Tests .

And in ODIs , both batted in the top 3. Not that absurd a comparison really.

 

[RyanRyan10]

No comparison here since Inzi had a much superior test record. Rohit has been a better odi batter but the gap in the most important is just too big.

 

[Ab Fan]

Tests - Inzy
ODIs - Rohit
Overall - Inzy

Rohit vs Zaheer Abbas would be more closer I think. Abbas has better ODI numbers than Inzy but his test performance is worse than Inzy and more at the level of Rohit.

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Tests - Inzamam
ODIs - Rohit

Overall, Inzi.

 

[Statpadder Inc]

Rohit the better odi batsman but overall it's inzamam without a doubt

 

[shaz619]

A Rohit vs Anwar thread might make more sense imo

But out the two I’d lean towards Inzi in ODI/Tests and Rohit in T20’s (How many of these did Inzi even play?)

 

[shaz619]

Who was the better fielder and runner between the wickets?

I think Inzi wins that one easily.

Who had the better diet?

Rohit probably

 

[Ab Fan]

Who was the better fielder and runner between the wickets?

I think Inzi wins that one easily.

Who had the better diet?

Rohit probably

Yeah hard to look past Inzy in terms of fielding and running between wickets

 

[Statpadder Inc]

Who was the better fielder and runner between the wickets?

I think Inzi wins that one easily.

Who had the better diet?

Rohit probably

Lol wasn't inzamam infamous for his running between the wickets.
Most casuals remember him for his comical run outs and unfortunately not his incredible batting

 

[kron]

What a joke comparison. Rohit is a nothing batsman compares to inzi.

In tests inzi easy

In odis too I would take inzi. Rohit plays in a batsman friendly era. He always chokes when it matters too.

 

[sweep_shot]

Inzamam wins in Test easily. No contest.

In ODI, it is a tie.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Inzi Test average - 49.1
Rohit Test average - 44.5

Inzi ODI average - 39
Rohit ODI average - 49

Rohit is a better fielder and lot more athletic than Inzi. I would trust Rohit to win the match by himself over Inzi doing the same easily.

Overall, I would pick Rohit any day in any conditions.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Inzamam wins in Test easily. No contest.

In ODI, it is a tie.

ODI is a tie?
Rohit is 10 times the ODI player that Inzi could ever be.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

A prime Inzi better than RS

 

[PakEngFan]

ODI is a tie?
Rohit is 10 times the ODI player that Inzi could ever be.

Based on what? You can't compare the era inzi played in and the one Rohit is currently playing in.

 

[Buffet]

What a joke comparison. Rohit is a nothing batsman compares to inzi.

In tests inzi easy

In odis too I would take inzi. Rohit plays in a batsman friendly era. He always chokes when it matters too.

Inzzy was more horrible when it mattered. Yes, many may cite his one knock in WC, but his overall performance in WC is horrible. We can't say that one knock covers 20-30 failures.

Inzzy, 35 ODI WC games : Avg 23

Forget about WC games. Just take random finals he played,

35 finals: Avg 29

---------------

Coming back to comparison.

In test: Inzzy ( No comparison)


In ODI: Rohit ( No comparison )


Overall, I will take Inzzy.

 

[PakEngFan]

Inzi by a country mile.

 

[Champ_Pal]

A prime Inzi better than RS

A Prime Rohit on song is 100 times better than Inzi in his prime on song. Inzi cannot hit a double even in flat decks on tiny grounds.

Inzi is limited even though he seemed to have lot of time while playing pacers.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Based on what? You can't compare the era inzi played in and the one Rohit is currently playing in.

I have watched Inzi bat all through the 90's and 2000's. Inzi cannot hit like Rohit and cannot accelerate at will like Rohit. Inzi is a liability with his running between the wickets too. A horror show in fact.

 

[PakEngFan]

I have watched Inzi bat all through the 90's and 2000's. Inzi cannot hit like Rohit and cannot accelerate at will like Rohit. Inzi is a liability with his running between the wickets too. A horror show in fact.

Again inzi was a middle order bat and so was Rohit where he flopped. Inzi played in an era where 250 was a winning score and Rohit plays in an era where 350 is not safe. Inzi played in an era with bigger boundaries along with 1 ball.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Again inzi was a middle order bat and so was Rohit where he flopped. Inzi played in an era where 250 was a winning score and Rohit plays in an era where 350 is not safe. Inzi played in an era with bigger boundaries along with 1 ball.

Inzi could not open man. Had he opened, his average would be way down in low 30's.

Sehwag who played several years when Inzi was playing could hit better than Inzi. Rohit is a much better striker than Sehwag.

Rohit is on a different level to Inzi in ODI's.

 

[jnaveen1980]

ODI Rohit sharma comfortably. He is almost an ATG opener. In tests Rohit barely had a career.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Inzzy was more horrible when it mattered. Yes, many may cite his one knock in WC, but his overall performance in WC is horrible. We can't say that one knock covers 20-30 failures.

Inzzy, 35 ODI WC games : Avg 23

Forget about WC games. Just take random finals he played,

35 finals: Avg 29

---------------

Coming back to comparison.

In test: Inzzy ( No comparison)


In ODI: Rohit ( No comparison )


Overall, I will take Inzzy.

I remember Inzi shredding weight for 2003 world cup to improve performance. He and Mahela had one of the worst world cup in history for a specialist batsman.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Having said that in ODIs Inzamam > Babar for sure. He can be more destructive than Babar.

 

[Cricket Warrior]

Rohit Sharma is a modern day great but i will pick Inzimam in pressure games.

 

[ads101]

It’s Rohit. In LOI Rohit is arguably an ATG. Especially ODIs. Inzi isn’t at that level/ATG in any format, nor was the even in the contention of the best amongst his peers. Inzi had a longer and better test career, but an average of 45 as opener isn’t exactly bad. It’s more Rohit should have played more. And it’s generally harder to open in test cricket too.

 

[sweep_shot]

It’s Rohit. In LOI Rohit is arguably an ATG. Especially ODIs. Inzi isn’t at that level/ATG in any format, nor was the even in the contention of the best amongst his peers. Inzi had a longer and better test career, but an average of 45 as opener isn’t exactly bad. It’s more Rohit should have played more. And it’s generally harder to open in test cricket too.

Averages in modern times are inflated.

It was harder to bat during Inzi's time.

Inzi faced much better bowlers than Rohit also.

 

[pillionrider]

Rohit Sharma is an ATG ODI player. Inzy isn't. So Rohit wins that easily.

As just a pure batsman, irrespective of the format, in either of their eras, if the question were asked:
Who is the best batsman in the world?

There was a phase when Inzy's name would pop into the Sachin, Lara, Ponting list.
Rohit's never has, unless the questioner pointedly asked about white-ball cricket.

I enjoyed watching Inzy and love Rohit. But this is reality as I see it.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Inzi averaged 50 for Pakistan in tests. That random world XI game pulls his average down under 50.

How many players in the history of test cricket average 50 for their country having played more than 100 matches?

He is a test great for sure and a very good ODI player.

Rohit is an ODI great and an above average test player. The discrepancies between his home and away test averages pull his overall test rating down.

Inzi therefore is the better player across both formats.

 

[ahmadharis1]

Rohit Sharma is a much better ODI player, and I probably give a slight edge to Inzy in tests but Rohit has been extraordinary lately since opening in tests too.

Across formats if I had to pick one I'd probably lean Rohit Sharma

 

[Cover Drive Six]

Rohit is almost the GOAT in ODIs, second only to Kohli. He is already in the top 5 list of the best ODI batsmen. Additionally, he has dominated World Cups, whereas Inzy has very ordinary statistics in comparison.

In Tests, there's no doubt Inzy has a better record over Rohit, but lately Rohit has also been performing well in Tests.
Overall, I would choose Rohit.

 

[Buffet]

I remember Inzi shredding weight for 2003 world cup to improve performance. He and Mahela had one of the worst world cup in history for a specialist batsman.

Inzzy is literally the worst-performing batsman to play 25 games as a specialist batsman in the entire history of WC.

37 batsmen have played more than 25 games in WC. Inzzy is positioned at 37 out of 37. The same situations in finals(even including tri-series - avg 29). Same situation in Bilaterals against the top two teams of his era. He averages 30 against Sa and Aus.

 

[kingusama92]

I would choose Inzi.

There is a clear gap between the two in Tests and Inzi was also a decent ODI batsman with clutch knocks sprinkled throughout his career. Rohit is the better ODI batsman but I don't think it covers the difference in Test cricket.

It's not a huge gap between the two if we combine both formats but still Inzi is slightly better for me.

 

[jnaveen1980]

Inzzy is literally the worst-performing batsman to play 25 games as a specialist batsman in the entire history of WC.

37 batsmen have played more than 25 games in WC. Inzzy is positioned at 37 out of 37. The same situations in finals(even including tri-series - avg 29). Same situation in Bilaterals against the top two teams of his era. He averages 30 against Sa and Aus.



View attachment 142151

For all his semi final effort in his debut season he went missing in several matches in the world cups. None better than his final world cup match against Ireland

 

[Buffet]

For all his semi final effort in his debut season he went missing in several matches in the world cups. None better than his final world cup match against Ireland

Not several matches, pretty much the all WCs except 2-3 matches. You can't average 23 after 35 WC matches without failing one WC after another.

 

[ads101]

Averages in modern times are inflated.

It was harder to bat during Inzi's time.

Inzi faced much better bowlers than Rohit also.

Rohit’s numbers are way better regardless in LOI. I don’t think we can attribute that simply to inflated stats or better bowlers. In fact he’s probably the most prolific in his era after Kohli himself. In last few years you could even make the case he has been the best overall. I don’t think at any point Inzi has achieved that.

As for tests tbh the stats haven’t changed much. There’s still hardly anyone averaging around 50.

There is a case maybe in terms of tests outweighing. But I honestly think there is a huge difference in LOI between them.

 

[Tera Gawaandi]

It's unfair to compare Inzi to ODI ATG Rohit.

Let's do a fair comparison with his contemporary Rahul Dravid.

ODIs -

Inzi and Dravid have exact same ODI stat, both played around 350 matches, both average 39 at SR around 72
10 Centuries for Inzi and 12 for Dravid
Both scored 83 50s.

Out of Inzi's 10 100s, 4 against India, 4 against SL, 1 against Zimbabwe, 1 New Zealand.
Out of Dravid's 12 100s, 2 against Pakistan, 3 against SL, 3 against WI, 2 New Zealand, 1 UAE, 1 Kenya.

Inzi averages 26 in Australia, 34 in Eng, 24 in NZ, 27 in SA
Dravid averages 33 in Australia, 46 in Eng, 38 in NZ, 45 in SA

Inzi averages 57 at Home, Dravid 43 at home.

Both averages highest on Pakistan pitches, 57 for Inzi, 50 for Dravid

Inzi averages 23 in 35 WC matches and his highest score is 81. Dravid averages 62 in 22 matches and he has 2 100s in WC. Again both have same strike rate of 75 in WCs.

Same story in ICC Championship Trophy, Inzi averages 21 with not a single 50, Dravid averages 49 with 6 50s.

Tests -

Inzi played 120 matches, Dravid 164.
Both scored a 100 every 8 innings, Inzi 25 in 200 innings and Dravid 36 in 286 innings.
Both average similar Inzi 50 and Dravid 52

Inzi averages 30 in Aus, 42 in Eng, 31 in SA, 60 in NZ
Dravid avg 41 in Aus, 68 in Eng, 30 in SA, 64 in NZ

Inzi avg 53 home, 45 away
Drvaid avg 51 home, 53 away

Inzi has clearly underachieved for someone who is touted as most talented Pakistani batsman ever. With ODI stat's like these, Inzi's place would not be secure in Indian ODI team. He would not face Prasad, Kuruvila, Ishant, BalaJii instead would be against Waqar, Aqib, Wasim, Akhtar, Mushtaq, Saqlain.

 

[Pakpak]

Having said that in ODIs Inzamam > Babar for sure. He can be more destructive than Babar.

Inzi was garbage in any crunch games unless it was not a WC and unless not against India. I'd take Babar over him in crunch games anyday. Against India though in bilaterals Inzi was a beast. Although where Babar hasnt had any biltaerals against India even if he did unlike Inzi he'd face a top bowling attack versus the pop tarts Inzi faced vs India.

 

[ravisurya]

Inzi by a country mile. Sharma is many rungs below as a test batsman.

 

[kron]

A prime Inzi better than RS

Much much better. Not even close. Rohit. Just pull up his record in tests outside Asia.

Also in odi it's a farce. Batting friendly era. Yea the bowlers are quality but the rules are so rigged in favour of batting. Inzi was a better batsman even in odi for me.

 

[kron]

A Prime Rohit on song is 100 times better than Inzi in his prime on song. Inzi cannot hit a double even in flat decks on tiny grounds.

Inzi is limited even though he seemed to have lot of time while playing pacers.

Yea rohit is great at hitting double centuries in pointless bilaterals

 

[kron]

Averages in modern times are inflated.

It was harder to bat during Inzi's time.

Inzi faced much better bowlers than Rohit also.

Don't agree about better bowlers. Those same bowlers would struggle in current era too with the modern rules.

But I do agree it was a tougher era for batsman. So yes inzi>>> rohit

 

[Champ_Pal]

Yea rohit is great at hitting double centuries in pointless bilaterals

You have to look at Rohit's centuries in World cups and Champions Trophy too. Rohit is a beast in big tournaments.

Inzi also played a boat load of meaningless bilaterals too. He only had 10 centuries after playing 380 ODI's. With a weak batting lineup, he had a ton of opportunities to score centuries against weak bowling attacks of India, Srilanka, New Zealand and England. Only Australia, WI and South Africa had formidable bowling attacks.

Inzi was a good ODI batsman. There is no question about his talent. But he massively underachieved. He can blame his own poor fitness.

 

[charlie007]

If I had to choose 1 batsman between Inzi and Rohit to bat for my life, I’m dying for sure. They are both a good 2 levels below Tendulkar the Test and Tendulkar and Kohli the ODI batsmen.
Now that being out of the way, if talking about batting in a WC, I’d choose Rohit without a second thought. Same with batting against the best attacks in the world in their conditions, Inzamam would fold like a player having 2,3,6 in poker. In a long career, these averages speak a lot.
In Tests, however, while Rohit Sharma has improved a lot over the years, I would put Inzamam ahead. His record too in tests, as mediocre as it may be in South Africa and Australia that have had the greatest bowling attacks overall in combination with their alienness for Asian batsmen (movement and bounce) is somewhat more reliable than Rohit
Given I’d like to live a bit longer than a day, I’d choose Inzamam.
But make sure as hell, running between the wickets is not included in the analysis.

 

[BouncerGuy]

TBH it was not a fair comparison again between these 2 greats but Inzi edges out Rohit overall because of the era he played in. Rohit is a modern-day ODI great but he is not that good in Tests so Inzi for sure. Rohit has scored heavily in the tournaments where Inzi failed at it, but if you look at the quality of bowling they both faced, inzi had to face McGrath, and lee type bowlers and the rules then were also a bit tough then nowadays which are more inclined towards batting.

 

[charlie007]

TBH it was not a fair comparison again between these 2 greats but Inzi edges out Rohit overall because of the era he played in. Rohit is a modern-day ODI great but he is not that good in Tests so Inzi for sure. Rohit has scored heavily in the tournaments where Inzi failed at it, but if you look at the quality of bowling they both faced, inzi had to face McGrath, and lee type bowlers and the rules then were also a bit tough then nowadays which are more inclined towards batting.

I agree it’s never an apples to apples comparison. Yes, different bowlers, different rules, and different conditions changes the equation a lot. But as the game evolves, there are other changes too. In Inzi’s time 250 was a decent score, but now 350 is quite gettable, and so the batting style and approach changes too, aggression becomes very important and hence risks are greater.
BTW, this is supposed to be the most bowling friendly era stats wise, there was an article about it. So it’s all very subjective.
It’s never a fair comparison across eras.

 

[Hitman]

In ODI's, Inzamam was merely a good batsman with pathetic records in World Cups and Tournament Finals. Rohit is much, much better than him.

In Tests, Inzamam was much better anyday.

 

[PakEngFan]

Inzi could not open man. Had he opened, his average would be way down in low 30's.

Sehwag who played several years when Inzi was playing could hit better than Inzi. Rohit is a much better striker than Sehwag.

Rohit is on a different level to Inzi in ODI's.

Rohit wouldn't have been able to open in that era either. As I am saying you are comparing different eras. In this era he would have no problem averaging 50+ as an opener. Look at some of the players averages in odis you seriously think he wouldn't? The only thing you are coming up is with he's a better hitter which I haven't denied.