What's new

The league of Sachin Tendulkar and Brian Lara | Does any other modern era batsman belong in it?

The league of Tendulkar-Lara | Does any other modern era batsman belong in it?

  • None

    Votes: 13 13.7%

  • Ricky Ponting

    Votes: 41 43.2%

  • Kumar Sangakkara

    Votes: 15 15.8%

  • Rahul Dravid

    Votes: 12 12.6%

  • Jaques Kallis

    Votes: 7 7.4%

  • Kevin Pieterson

    Votes: 1 1.1%

  • Other

    Votes: 6 6.3%
  • Total voters
    95
Chrish said:
Not comparing ODI or test.. I am talking about relative entertainment they provide in the formats they are good at
Click to expand...

It wasn't directed at you bro. Lara had a unique wristy style that can't be matched. As you mentioned Kohli's also class, only more mechanical because he's fro the Tendulkar - Gavaskar lineage.
 
anuk said:
kohli is somewhere between the the genius of lara and the almost robot like run accumulation of tendulkar.
Click to expand...

I have issues with this comment. Tendulkar wasn't a genius? Style = Genius?

I would claim Tendulkar was more exceptional as a batting talent. He could pull off more unbelievable shots than Lara. The electrifying upper cut he brought back to the game was ahead of anything any batsman of his generation did with the bat except for maybe the McCullum scoops later in the T20 era.
 
freelance_cricketer said:
I have issues with this comment. Tendulkar wasn't a genius? Style = Genius?

I would claim Tendulkar was more exceptional as a batting talent. He could pull off more unbelievable shots than Lara. The electrifying upper cut he brought back to the game was ahead of anything any batsman of his generation did with the bat except for maybe the McCullum scoops later in the T20 era.
Click to expand...

Difference between Lara & Tendulkar:

Lara's straight forward easy catch was dropped in the slips when he played a false shot vs Mcgrath by Mark Waugh I believe which ensured he got the 100 and WI won the match in that 2001 series vs Aus in WI............. (MATCH WINNER)

Catch from that Tendulkar's impatient shot against Saqlain was not dropped and rest of the team wasn't good enough to score a measly 17 runs vs Pakistan in the Chennai test match.............. (NON FINISHER)

Cricket is a game of luck and Lara had more luck. Talent, skill wise they are same, SRT more pleasing on the eye...........
 
Last edited:
Romali_rotti said:
Difference between Lara & Tendulkar:

Lara's straight forward easy catch was dropped in the slips when he played a false shot vs Mcgrath by Mark Waugh I believe which ensured he got the 100 and WI won the match in that 2001 series vs Aus in WI............. (MATCH WINNER)

Catch from that Tendulkar's impatient shot against Saqlain was not dropped and rest of the team wasn't good enough to score a measly 17 runs vs Pakistan in the Chennai test match.............. (NON FINISHER)

Cricket is a game of luck and Lara had more luck. Talent, skill wise they are same, SRT more pleasing on the eye...........
Click to expand...


Absolutely agreed,

Nobody ever mentions Pakistan's bowling line up in India was twice as good as Australia's in West Indies.

Nobody ever mentions Tendulkar was dealing with severe back pain.

That was one heck of an effort from Sachin. The way he took on Saqlain and Waqar is nothing less than Goddy.
 
Tendulkar would have loved to play carefree cricket with no consequences like Lara did. The great man was on top of the world for 20 years under extreme pressure. That's a testament to his nerves of steel, passion and fitness.
 
rhony said:
Tendulkar would have loved to play carefree cricket with no consequences like Lara did. The great man was on top of the world for 20 years under extreme pressure. That's a testament to his nerves of steel, passion and fitness.
Click to expand...

Lara had it harder actually.. I reckon if he had the same support that SRT did in 2nd half of his career he would have ended up with even better figures

That being said SRT too was a lone army in 90s.. Things got better for him only in 2000s.
 
Chrish said:
Lara had it harder actually.. I reckon if he had the same support that SRT did in 2nd half of his career he would have ended up with even better figures

That being said SRT too was a lone army in 90s.. Things got better for him only in 2000s.
Click to expand...

Lara never feared that his house would be stoned if he played poorly. Also, Lara oversaw the downfall of WI cricket without many consequences. SRT received support because he was still making runs.
 
rhony said:
Lara never feared that his house would be stoned if he played poorly. Also, Lara oversaw the downfall of WI cricket without many consequences. SRT received support because he was still making runs.
Click to expand...

SRT received support because his team got far superior batsmen in later half of his career..

I personally rate SRT ahead of Lara but will call it a hogwash on lara had it free and easy etc.. Also house burning argument is pure straw clutching
 
Chrish said:
SRT received support because his team got far superior batsmen in later half of his career..

I personally rate SRT ahead of Lara but will call it a hogwash on lara had it free and easy etc.. Also house burning argument is pure straw clutching
Click to expand...

You will have no idea as an outsider what an Indian cricketer goes through. I am an outsider myself but have close ties to India. They are under more pressure than every other cricketer. Pakistan players are a close 2nd. The pressure is considerably less for Australians. English, WI etc.

I never said Lara had it easy. I just said he was carefree and did not go through the pressures that Tendu did. When millions of people think you are next to god, that is something else. With that weight on your shoulders, I am not sure if I even want to get out of bed.

This is unless Gooch, Walsh and Ponting have secret temples or churches built for them.
 
rhony said:
You will have no idea as an outsider what an Indian cricketer goes through. I am an outsider myself but have close ties to India. They are under more pressure than every other cricketer. Pakistan players are a close 2nd. The pressure is considerably less for Australians. English, WI etc.

I never said Lara had it easy. I just said he was carefree and did not go through the pressures that Tendu did. When millions of people think you are next to god, that is something else. With that weight on your shoulders, I am not sure if I even want to get out of bed.

This is unless Gooch, Walsh and Ponting have secret temples or churches built for them.
Click to expand...

Lol OK..
 
Chrish said:
Lara had it harder actually.. I reckon if he had the same support that SRT did in 2nd half of his career he would have ended up with even better figures

That being said SRT too was a lone army in 90s.. Things got better for him only in 2000s.
Click to expand...


Lara was totally finished as a cricketer when he retired while Sachin had a nearly 90s like grand resurgence from 2007-2010. To suggest Lara would have ended with better figures than Sachin had he gone on is one wild guess and far from a realistic claim. In ODIs he wasn't even close and in tests you're dealing in ifs and buts. Ifs and buts don't decide legacies, Tendulkar could have done greater things with same conditions. Rhony is right, Lara had the privilege to play risk free cricket, Tendulkar had to justify every dismissal of his. Anything less than century for him was considered failure in India.

I think the greatest indicator of the pressure is that everytime Tendulkar played alongside a fellow great, he overshadowed him be it Lara in exhibition games or Ponting in IPL. Somehow most greats found it rather intimidating to be under the same spotlight that was all on Sachin like Sauron's eye.
 
freelance_cricketer said:
Lara was totally finished as a cricketer when he retired while Sachin had a nearly 90s like grand resurgence from 2007-2010. To suggest Lara would have ended with better figures than Sachin had he gone on is one wild guess and far from a realistic claim. In ODIs he wasn't even close and in tests you're dealing in ifs and buts. Ifs and buts don't decide legacies, Tendulkar could have done greater things with same conditions. Rhony is right, Lara had the privilege to play risk free cricket, Tendulkar had to justify every dismissal of his. Anything less than century for him was considered failure in India.

I think the greatest indicator of the pressure is that everytime Tendulkar played alongside a fellow great, he overshadowed him be it Lara in exhibition games or Ponting in IPL. Somehow most greats found it rather intimidating to be under the same spotlight that was all on Sachin like Sauron's eye.
Click to expand...

Are you sure? Lara scored 2 hundreds in his last 3 matches including double ton in 2nd last match, you know?

If anything more reason to respect him for quitting when your head is high.. Can't be said the same about Viv, Sachin, Ponting etc..
 
Chrish said:
Are you sure? Lara scored 2 hundreds in his last 3 matches including double ton in 2nd last match, you know?

If anything more reason to respect him for quitting when your head is high.. Can't be said the same about Viv, Sachin, Ponting etc..
Click to expand...

No.

Lara came to ICL immediately after retirement. Failed royally. Hasn't done anything of note in any form of cricket he's played ever since. Tendulkar had a resurgence, why would you ignore that? Lara wouldn't have beaten any record. His got beaten by roughly 3000 runs.
 
freelance_cricketer said:
No.

Lara came to ICL immediately after retirement. Failed royally. Hasn't done anything of note in any form of cricket he's played ever since. Tendulkar had a resurgence, why would you ignore that? Lara wouldn't have beaten any record. His got beaten by roughly 3000 runs.
Click to expand...

What he did after the retirement is irrelevant.. Your previous statement that he was finished as a player when he retired is factually incorrect..
 
Chrish said:
What he did after the retirement is irrelevant.. Your previous statement that he was finished as a player when he retired is factually incorrect..
Click to expand...

We are in the same boat. You're playing on ifs and buts, i am taking his immediate form in ICL after world cup as an indicator of him losing it as a player. Sports are as much about having the mental strength to continue than they are about skills. Playing for 24 years isn't anything like people on here suggest. No one gets to play that long unless they're that good and have the hunger in them. Lara retired for reasons best known to him. We can only judge him for what he did.
 
freelance_cricketer said:
We are in the same boat. You're playing on ifs and buts, i am taking his immediate form in ICL after world cup as an indicator of him losing it as a player. Sports are as much about having the mental strength to continue than they are about skills. Playing for 24 years isn't anything like people on here suggest. No one gets to play that long unless they're that good and have the hunger in them. Lara retired for reasons best known to him. We can only judge him for what he did.
Click to expand...

I could care less what he did after the retirement.. He was far from "finished" before he hung up his boots
 
It's good that Kohli is breaking all kinds of records in T20s but personally I would be terribly disappointed if his form runs out of steam in Tests because ultimately the pedigree of a player is decided by Tests and not T20s.

There have been many comparisons made between him and Sachin, but I think he is already matching him in LOIs but the difference between Tendulkar and Kohli at this stage of his career is that Sachin ended up as the highest run scorer in a world cup as a 23 year old and was widely regarded as one of the best ever Test players in the history of the game at Kohli's present age. Kohli has a fair distance to go to reach that stature but he sure is a fighter and let's see how his career pans out.
 
street cricketer said:
It's good that Kohli is breaking all kinds of records in T20s but personally I would be terribly disappointed if his form runs out of steam in Tests because ultimately the pedigree of a player is decided by Tests and not T20s.

There have been many comparisons made between him and Sachin, but I think he is already matching him in LOIs but the difference between Tendulkar and Kohli at this stage of his career is that Sachin ended up as the highest run scorer in a world cup as a 23 year old and was widely regarded as one of the best ever Test players in the history of the game at Kohli's present age. Kohli has a fair distance to go to reach that stature but he sure is a fighter and let's see how his career pans out.
Click to expand...

Sachin will always be No.1 in India. Kohli can be the No.2 if he translates this performance to test cricket. One thing we know about Kohli is that he maximizes his potential and form like no other. The test series in AUS against Johnson co where he scored 4 100s in 4 tests is a testament to his steel. He'll do great things for sure. Why wouldn't he?
 
Cricket is a game of luck and Lara had more luck.
Click to expand...


http://www.espncricinfo.com/ausvwi/content/story/230189.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/3921701.stm
http://www.espncricinfo.com/dlfcup/content/story/260491.html

In the 2005, WI vs Aus series alone, the ICC apologized for three wrongful Lara dismissals.

never said Lara had it easy. I just said he was carefree and did not go through the pressures that Tendu did.
Click to expand...

Lara faced different kinds of pressure; namely a hostile board. Since his first tour of England, where he threatened to walk out, Lara was involved in 9 team payment disputes (many with walkouts), six threats from the WICB over disputes over team selection, and several disputes over his daring to publicly call out the WICB for neglecting pitches, and for scrapping educational aids to illiterate cricketers.


Lara was totally finished as a cricketer when he retired
Click to expand...

Lara didn't "retire" from tests. He was pushed out by the WICB 18 months early. He retired from ODI's to focus on tests, but due to internal politics within the WICB, was forced out. He was in a large peak when he retired (akin to Sanga's retirement peak); a far greater peak than Tendy and Ponting's twilight years, both of whom suffered from dwindling reflexes.


Lara had the privilege to play risk free cricket
Click to expand...

This makes no sense. This video from 10 minutes on sums up most of Lara's games:

https://youtu.be/PRWc1sBTM4U?t=10m19s

He plays carefully, plays himself in, then all wickets fall at the other end and he's forced to go into T20 mode to pile on big runs before his team is out. It happened time and time again.


It's good that Kohli is breaking all kinds of records in T20s but personally I would be terribly disappointed if his form runs out of steam in Tests because ultimately the pedigree of a player is decided by Tests and not T20s.
Click to expand...

Kohli will do fine in tests once Anderson retires. What other decent swing bowler in the world is there? He will feast on everyone.
 
Last edited:
TestMatch said:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/ausvwi/content/story/230189.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/3921701.stm
http://www.espncricinfo.com/dlfcup/content/story/260491.html

In the 2005, WI vs Aus series alone, the ICC apologized for three wrongful Lara dismissals.


.
Click to expand...

So your point is ? It doesnt take away Lara's easy catch was dropped in 2001 which wouldve ensured WI lost the match.... Also during India's tour of Aus, SRT was subjected to the same or more horrible decisions by aussie home umpires..Luckwise Lara>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> SRT
 
Mamoon said:
Tier 1: Tendulkar, Lara

Tier 1.5: Ponting

Tier 2: Kallis, Sangakkara, Dravid, Pietersen

de Villiers is Tier 1 potentially, Kohli Tier 1.5 at the moment (but can go up to Tier 1) while Amla is Tier 2 material for me along with Graeme Smith and Hayden, simply because he does not impose himself much on the opposition and has a soft personality, along with very few meaningful knock in ODIs in spite of brilliant statistics.

Younis will be a tier 3 batsman along with Inzamam and MoYo because of his rubbish performances in ODIs, but he has been brilliant in Tests and Tier 2 material in that format only.

Michael Clarke is Tier 3 as well, and in the future Cook will end up in this tier as well.

However, players shouldn't be categorized into these tiers until they are done.

Many will put Ponting in Tier 1 but for me, he was inferior to Tendulkar and Lara but superior to Sangakkara, Kallis, Dravid and Pietersen.
Click to expand...

Nicely put up. Very good analysis.
 
Both Sachin and Lara are genius. Most talented batsmen I have seen in last 30 yrs. Kohli is nowhere close with the talent. I would even say Rohit more talented than Kohli.
 
Amazing how much hype AB got back then.

Back in 2015, he was in an unbelievable form.

Amla was also rated very highly but has regressed a bit too much.
 
I assume this is only about test cricket because Lara wasn't all that in the shorter format. Having said that, Kallis, Ponting, Khan, Amla, Dravid and Sangakkara are all up there with Sachin and Lara.

Tier 1 is for ATG batsmen like the guys mentioned above.

Tier 2 is for great batsmen such as Inzamam, KP, Clarke, Cook, ABD, Hayden, Chanderpaul, Jayawardene, etc.

Tier 3 is for the good batsmen such as Ian Bell, Ross Taylor, Misbah, Azhar, Pujara, Hussey, Vijay, etc.

Tier 4 is for the underachievers/mediocre batsmen like Duminy, Hafeez, Gambhir, Voges, Dhoni, etc.

There is little to no difference between players from the same tier but a substantial difference between players from different tiers. Same goes for bowlers.
 
Mamoon said:
My one criticism of Tendulkar is that most of his records are due to his longevity. For example, in spite of having a Test career spanning 20+ years, and 2,000 runs more than his closest rival, he features only twice in the top 15 list of most runs in a calendar year, that too 8 years apart (2002, 2010).

He never managed to score even a 250 and in spite of playing more Tests than anyone else in history and 32 more than his closest rival, he has 6 double-hundreds only. So if you consider impact only, he was never in league above his peers and that is reflected in his average, but he stands out for his record number of runs and hundreds which have to do more with longevity than anything else, because his hundred/innings ratio is not in a class of its own either.

However, I do rate him as the best batsman of his generation and without question among the top 4-5 of all time, because longevity is not easy. To maintain your form, fitness, motivation levels etc. for 20+ years shows extraordinary ability, mental strength and resilience.

There is a reason why we may never see a 200 Test player again in our lives, or someone to remain the most iconic player of his country for more than two decades.

If we talk about players in leagues of their own, Bradman and Viv Richards stand out more so than the others, because they were well ahead of their peers at that time, but Tendulkar is not in that category, because he never managed to put himself in a different league and there was always someone who could match him blow for blow (Lara, Ponting) at any given time, and Tendulkar fans should not take offense to this assessment.
Click to expand...

Not to forget that Sachin has never 500 or more runs in a series even once while almost every great batsman have done it multiple times. Kohli has already scored 600+ runs in a series 3 times.
 
Bilal7 said:
I assume this is only about test cricket because Lara wasn't all that in the shorter format. Having said that, Kallis, Ponting, Khan, Amla, Dravid and Sangakkara are all up there with Sachin and Lara.

Tier 1 is for ATG batsmen like the guys mentioned above.

Tier 2 is for great batsmen such as Inzamam, KP, Clarke, Cook, ABD, Hayden, Chanderpaul, Jayawardene, etc.

Tier 3 is for the good batsmen such as Ian Bell, Ross Taylor, Misbah, Azhar, Pujara, Hussey, Vijay, etc.

Tier 4 is for the underachievers/mediocre batsmen like Duminy, Hafeez, Gambhir, Voges, Dhoni, etc.

There is little to no difference between players from the same tier but a substantial difference between players from different tiers. Same goes for bowlers.
Click to expand...

Ross Taylor is twice the test batsman Misbah ever was.

And Gambhir was thrice the test batsman Hafeez ever was. Let's go of your bias for once.
 
Rahul1 said:
Ross Taylor is twice the test batsman Misbah ever was.

And Gambhir was thrice the test batsman Hafeez ever was. Let's go of your bias for once.
Click to expand...
You missed this gem from him that UAE khan is a tier 1 batsman.
 
Apart from the usual biased drivel, this is among the best threads on PP.
 
Rahul1 said:
Not to forget that Sachin has never 500 or more runs in a series even once while almost every great batsman have done it multiple times. Kohli has already scored 600+ runs in a series 3 times.
Click to expand...

True, but I guess no record in history holds up against micro-inspection. You can find holes in every career.
 
Bilal7 said:
I assume this is only about test cricket because Lara wasn't all that in the shorter format. Having said that, Kallis, Ponting, Khan, Amla, Dravid and Sangakkara are all up there with Sachin and Lara.

Tier 1 is for ATG batsmen like the guys mentioned above.

Tier 2 is for great batsmen such as Inzamam, KP, Clarke, Cook, ABD, Hayden, Chanderpaul, Jayawardene, etc.

Tier 3 is for the good batsmen such as Ian Bell, Ross Taylor, Misbah, Azhar, Pujara, Hussey, Vijay, etc.

Tier 4 is for the underachievers/mediocre batsmen like Duminy, Hafeez, Gambhir, Voges, Dhoni, etc.

There is little to no difference between players from the same tier but a substantial difference between players from different tiers. Same goes for bowlers.
Click to expand...

This is so biased lol.
[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] what do you make of this list?
 
Mamoon said:
3 years on, I don't necessarily agree with my tiers though.
Click to expand...

I meant 3 years ago only. A very good analysis it was 3 yrs ago.

At the moment, for me it would probably be Kohli in a 1.5 tier alongside RP while de Villiers a tier 2.

Amla has declined a bit too much in last 3 years. So, he is a tier 3 and so is Younis because he is a poor limited over player. Cook also a tier 3 I would say.
 
Ab Fan said:
I meant 3 years ago only. A very good analysis it was 3 yrs ago.

At the moment, for me it would probably be <B>Kohli in a 1.5 tier</B> alongside RP while de Villiers a tier 2.

Amla has declined a bit too much in last 3 years. So, he is a tier 3 and so is Younis because he is a poor limited over player. Cook also a tier 3 I would say.
Click to expand...

#Kohli ending up in the 1.5 tier
 
Bilal7 said:
I assume this is only about test cricket because Lara wasn't all that in the shorter format. Having said that, Kallis, Ponting, Khan, Amla, Dravid and Sangakkara are all up there with Sachin and Lara.

Tier 1 is for ATG batsmen like the guys mentioned above.

Tier 2 is for great batsmen such as Inzamam, KP, Clarke, Cook, ABD, Hayden, Chanderpaul, Jayawardene, etc.

Tier 3 is for the good batsmen such as Ian Bell, Ross Taylor, Misbah, Azhar, Pujara, Hussey, Vijay, etc.

Tier 4 is for the underachievers/mediocre batsmen like Duminy, Hafeez, Gambhir, Voges, Dhoni, etc.

There is little to no difference between players from the same tier but a substantial difference between players from different tiers. Same goes for bowlers.
Click to expand...

You don't Rate Kohli? :))
 
Steve Smith is more like modern day Bradman.. In a different plane compared to his competition.

Kohli/ Root etc can only be considered modern day Wally Hammonds.. Always in a shadow of the big man.
 
Chrish said:
Lara had it harder actually.. I reckon if he had the same support that SRT did in 2nd half of his career he would have ended up with even better figures

That being said SRT too was a lone army in 90s.. Things got better for him only in 2000s.
Click to expand...

Lara got fiery bowling line up behind him
And i dont want to talk about Indias bowlers in 90's
 
Amla is no more a tier ahead of his contemporaries as far as the format he used to be brilliant at once is concerned.

I consider Younis the best test batsmen since Sangakkara but he has no legacy in limited overs and lived mostly in the shadow of other great players from his era.
 
Your bhaijaan was correct after all, i don't see Kallis or Sangakkara featuring in many discussions nowadays. Having a reputation based purely on accumulated stats end up like this only. At the end of the day people remember players for their impact, iconic knocks, ability to take down top bowlers. If its not there it doesn't matter what you average people will forget you in few years.

When you think of Tendulkar you remember 16 year old facing the 2 Ws, the dessert storms, taking on Warne on rank turners in India, first ever double hundred, that centurion knock against Pakistan, the upper cut barrage in Bloemfontein against South Africans, that counter attack knock with Azharuddin in South Africa. heck a cameo vs McGrath in Kenya

When you think of Lara, you think of 375, 400, the test series vs Murali, destroying Warne, that 150+ vs Pakistan in Sharjah

Ponting is there as well. Even Dravid has those.

Kallis and Sangakkara however, not much. Pure run machines but hardly impacted any game. Dilshan, Jayasuriya and Mahela were more dangerous in Lanka. In SA you had G Smith.
 
Ponting with a test average of 52 hands down destroyed both Sangakkara and Kallis averaging 57+

The fans know their game. Credit to them.
 
One can put ponting with lara and tendu.. Ponting might be very slightly behind them but difference is marginal and one can put him with the other two..

Rest of the batsmen are a tier below or half a tier below atleast..
 
Chrish said:
Steve Smith is more like modern day Bradman.. In a different plane compared to his competition.

Kohli/ Root etc can only be considered modern day Wally Hammonds.. Always in a shadow of the big man.
Click to expand...

Actually, it is the other way round. Smith is undoubtedly the best Test batsman of this generation, but he is nowhere near Kohli across formats, who is the premier all-format batsman of this era.

This is the Kohli era and 25-30 years down the line, the 2010-2020 decade will be remembered for Kohli and de Villiers and not Smith, and that is because they have dominated all formats unlike Smith.

Smith is the one who is in the shadow of Kohli, along with Williamson and Root.

Smith might be the batsman of this generation in your opinion since you value Test cricket the most, but generally, batsmen who are great in all formats will always be rated higher and will have more fanfare.

Even young Australian domestic batsmen prefer Kohli over Smith, which says it all really. His legacy is not comparable to Kohli's.
 
ArsenalFC said:
This is so biased lol.

[MENTION=131701]Mamoon[/MENTION] what do you make of this list?
Click to expand...

Usual business for our friend - Amla and Younis in the same tier as Tendulkar, Lara and Ponting. Misbah and Azhar in the same tier as Ross Taylor, and Hafeez and Voges in the same tier as Dhoni and Gambhir.
 
Mamoon said:
Actually, it is the other way round. Smith is undoubtedly the best Test batsman of this generation, but he is nowhere near Kohli across formats, who is the premier all-format batsman of this era.

This is the Kohli era and 25-30 years down the line, the 2010-2020 decade will be remembered for Kohli and de Villiers and not Smith, and that is because they have dominated all formats unlike Smith.

Smith is the one who is in the shadow of Kohli, along with Williamson and Root.

Smith might be the batsman of this generation in your opinion since you value Test cricket the most, but generally, batsmen who are great in all formats will always be rated higher and will have more fanfare.

Even young Australian domestic batsmen prefer Kohli over Smith, which says it all really. His legacy is not comparable to Kohli's.
Click to expand...

Yes, I only take other formats into consideration when two players are very close in test format. However smith up until his isolation was streets ahead of others. So the argument ends right there for me.
 
Rahul1 said:
Ross Taylor is twice the test batsman Misbah ever was.

And Gambhir was thrice the test batsman Hafeez ever was. Let's go of your bias for once.
Click to expand...

I admit that I haven't followed Ross Taylor much and might be underrating him. However, what makes Gambhir three times the batsman Hafeez was? Both were hopeless overseas but superb in Asia, with a similar number of centuries, similar averages and strengths, weaknesses, etc. If anything, Hafeez's bowling makes him the better test player but this is solely about batting so its appropriate to have them on equal footing.

Tusker said:
You don't Rate Kohli? :))
Click to expand...

I do but I can't place him in a tier at the moment. His career can go in many different directions from here on out. Same with Smith, Root and Kane. The likes of Azhar and Pujara are easier to analyze because their ceiling is clearly defined.

Send1983 said:
You missed this gem from him that UAE khan is a tier 1 batsman.
Click to expand...

"UAE Khan" averages more than Rahul Dravid in Australia and South Africa, scored nearly twice as many runs in a single away match against England than Kohli has in his entire career and has a better record than nearly anyone else during 2010-2017. You can cry about it all you want but Khan is a legend.
 
Bilal7 said:
I admit that I haven't followed Ross Taylor much and might be underrating him. However, what makes Gambhir three times the batsman Hafeez was? Both were hopeless overseas but superb in Asia, with a similar number of centuries, similar averages and strengths, weaknesses, etc. If anything, Hafeez's bowling makes him the better test player but this is solely about batting so its appropriate to have them on equal footing.



I do but I can't place him in a tier at the moment. His career can go in many different directions from here on out. Same with Smith, Root and Kane. The likes of Azhar and Pujara are easier to analyze because their ceiling is clearly defined.



"UAE Khan" averages more than Rahul Dravid in Australia and South Africa, scored nearly twice as many runs in a single away match against England than Kohli has in his entire career and has a better record than nearly anyone else during 2010-2017. You can cry about it all you want but Khan is a legend.
Click to expand...

Don’t call him UAE Khan.

You may call him Yoni or Younis The Great Khan.
 
In this current era , I only see Kohli entering the league of Tendulkar and Lara.
 
[MENTION=151648]therealAB[/MENTION]

Ponting smashed Sangakkara and Kallis in this poll many years ago when the later two actually had more hype being freshly retired players.

4-5 years from then, the stocks of all 3 have dropped actually
 
freelance_cricketer said:
[MENTION=151648]therealAB[/MENTION]

Ponting smashed Sangakkara and Kallis in this poll many years ago when the later two actually had more hype being freshly retired players.

4-5 years from then, the stocks of all 3 have dropped actually
Click to expand...
Ponting is favoured because he was more exciting and better at all formats. In terms of quality he is no better
Just because a lot of people think one thing does not mean it is correct
 
therealAB said:
Just because a lot of people think one thing does not mean it is correct
Click to expand...

That's true but he smashed the competition.

I am.addressing it because you had asked me previously what i meant by stature.

This is what stature is bro
 
therealAB said:
So stature is bein ranked highly without the performances to back it up. I will pass ty
Click to expand...

Just giving you an example bro since stature cannot be quantified in any statistics.

When i talked about Tendulkar, you passed it off as Indian propaganda hence giving example of a non Indian player. Ponting's stature is not a result of Indian propaganda, if anything he's not much liked in India due to numerous incidents of being a douche bag on field. But the guy's a superstar at a level neither of Kallis/Sangakkara have ever reached.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

atreus
  • Article Article
Viv Richards and Sachin Tendulkar — are they really far apart statistically?
Replies
7
Views
440
atreus
atreus
mominsaigol
Why do some Test greats struggle in White-Ball cricket and vice versa?
Replies
65
Views
993
kron
K
Ab Fan
Joe Root versus Ricky Ponting versus Kumar Sangakkara in Tests
2 3
Replies
175
Views
4K
shamaan
S
atreus
  • Poll Poll
Ricky Ponting vs Hashim Amla – Who was the superior Test batter?
Replies
39
Views
849
atreus
atreus
Unbiased-Fan
Who do you think are the top 10 greatest ODI batters of all time?
2
Replies
98
Views
5K
Fanboy375
Fanboy375
Back
Top