[VIDEOS/ PICTURES] Virat Kohli has secured his position as an ATG

[sensible-indian-fan]

Kohli has the personality of a captain. He needs to be more tactically during the game and also make the right selections.

Having a better support staff will help in the player selection. But Kohli also needs to reign in his ego and listen to the support staff.

As for tactics during game play, that will come from experience and having a strong deputy. Even Imran Khan and Ganguly were not tactically strong. But they had good support Miandad, Tendulkar, Dravid and Kumble. Kohli needs to have a deputy needs to have good intelligence.

But, again Kohli needs to be able to listen to these guys when they have a point.

Imran and Ganguly weren't great tacticians but they weren't super dumb & corrupt like Kohli.

Dhawan played all 5 tests. Freaking Dhawan. Damn.

 

[the_outsider]

Imran and Ganguly weren't great tacticians but they weren't super dumb & corrupt like Kohli.

Dhawan played all 5 tests. Freaking Dhawan. Damn.

This was the first time Dhawan played a full overseas tour. The first time!

Everyone deserves one chance.

I don't think he will be part of the test team going forward.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

This was the first time Dhawan played a full overseas tour. The first time!

Everyone deserves one chance.

I don't think he will be part of the test team going forward.

He may have played full series just now but he got a fair shot at SENA last time too.

By the way, it's not true he played the full series just now.

Dhawan in SENA:

Full series in SA 2013. 2 tests.
Full series in NZ 2013. 2 tests.
2 tests in Eng 2014 (maybe more don't remember).
Half series in Aus 2014. 2 tests.
1 test in SA 2018.
Full series in Eng 2018.

Still averaged mid 20s. Looked hopeless last cycle. Bashed some easy teams in Asia on pattas and was brought back.

Dhawan never deserved a chance in SENA. Everyone knew he will fail except our management.

 

[rudra]

If 36 avg in eng is poor...what will you call career avg of england's great captain michael vaughan ?

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

If 36 avg in eng is poor...what will you call career avg of england's great captain michael vaughan ?

Only rookies and noobs will judge Kohli by his overall average in England.

Just laugh and ignore their attempts. lol.

You have to breakdown by series to get a real picture.

 

[the_outsider]

He may have played full series just now but he got a fair shot at SENA last time too.

By the way, it's not true he played the full series just now.

Dhawan in SENA:

Full series in SA 2013. 2 tests.
Full series in NZ 2013. 2 tests.
2 tests in Eng 2014 (maybe more don't remember).
Half series in Aus 2014. 2 tests.
1 test in SA 2018.
Full series in Eng 2018.

Still averaged mid 20s. Looked hopeless last cycle. Bashed some easy teams in Asia on pattas and was brought back.

Dhawan never deserved a chance in SENA. Everyone knew he will fail except our management.

As you see yourself he's been given only 2 "full" series, (if you can even call a 2 test series a "full" one).

And that too scored in the NZ series scoring 100+ and 98 in the 2 matches in NZ. So in the 2 "full" chances he had previously got, he excelled above all others in one of them.

I agree with you that Dhawan should not be in the test team. But I also believe in the principle that everyone should get a fair chance i.e. the same kind of opportunity others got. Now that that's out of the way, I have no issue never seeing Dhawan in whites again.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

As you see yourself he's been given only 2 "full" series, (if you can even call a 2 test series a "full" one).

And that too scored in the NZ series scoring 100+ and 98 in the 2 matches in NZ. So in the 2 "full" chances he had previously got, he excelled above all others in one of them.

I agree with you that Dhawan should not be in the test team. But I also believe in the principle that everyone should get a fair chance i.e. the same kind of opportunity others got. Now that that's out of the way, I have no issue never seeing Dhawan in whites again.

Personally, I don't believe everyone deserves the same opportunities.

If a player doesn't look like he is gonna click (technique, approach wise) and he fails in a few series, he should be booted out. Some players with potential to play in a particular format can be backed.

 

[the_outsider]

Personally, I don't believe everyone deserves the same opportunities.

If a player doesn't look like he is gonna click (technique, approach wise) and he fails in a few series, he should be booted out. Some players with potential to play in a particular format can be backed.

I understand. It's a matter of the style of leadership one chooses to follow and that's a personal matter.

Nothing wrong with either of our opinions, I feel.

But one thing we can all agree on is that Dhawan is best kept away from the test team. It makes sense to have him as a back-up opener for Asian tests (for eg, if one of the regular openers is out for 1-2 tests). But that should be the maximum extent of Dhawan's test career from now on. Let him focus on LOIs. He's a fantastic LOI bat anyway.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

I understand. It's a matter of the style of leadership one chooses to follow and that's a personal matter.

Nothing wrong with either of our opinions, I feel.

But one thing we can all agree on is that Dhawan is best kept away from the test team. It makes sense to have him as a back-up opener for Asian tests (for eg, if one of the regular openers is out for 1-2 tests). But that should be the maximum extent of Dhawan's test career from now on. Let him focus on LOIs. He's a fantastic LOI bat anyway.

I agree.

Trying new openers and keeping one of them as backup is better imho. Always a risky move to keep Dhawan as backup as he may slam a century or two in some home games and then put selectors in a tough spot.

In ODIs, Dhawan is a gun. Scores a lot of runs in tourneys and clutch as hell.

In T20Is, we may need to change more than half of the team. Dhoni, Pandey, Dhawan, Rahane, Unadkat, Dhawal, etc lol.

 

[cricketjoshila]

This was the first time Dhawan played a full overseas tour. The first time!

Everyone deserves one chance.

I don't think he will be part of the test team going forward.

Dhawan doesnot deserve even 1 test. Let alone a century.

 

[New Yorker]

Younis khan
Centuries in SENA :5
Virat Kohli
Centuries in Sena:11(half the matches)
This is all i need to know who was better in overseas conditions. If virat kohli doesn't retire as a better batsman than younis khan then he will be the biggest underachiever in the history of modern cricket.
All stuffs like centuries in won series overseas etc etc trash makes even abd, amla, smith better batsman than lara, sachin.

Actually Younis has 7 centuries outside Asia. But Kohli is of course a cut above.

 

[Mamoon]

Actually Younis has 7 centuries outside Asia. But Kohli is of course a cut above.

SENA = South Africa, England, New Zealand and Australia.

Younis has five in SENA countries, and one in West Indies and Zimbabwe each. The 200* in Zimbabwe was a great innings though, preventing Pakistan from getting whitewashed in Zimbabwe which would have been an unimaginable disaster.

 

[Blistering Barnacle]

Why are Kohli fans trying to push Kohli being accepted as an ATG now on others?

Any neutral observer would say that it's too early to call him that.

Only complete and utter kohli worshippers would say he is already an ATG.

 

[Ted123]

He is good but his impact in 4th inning is lacking, which is why India haven't won enough matches.

But still he is on his way to ATG because he scores big in first three innings of the match.

 

[the_outsider]

He is good but his impact in 4th inning is lacking, which is why India haven't won enough matches.

But still he is on his way to ATG because he scores big in first three innings of the match.

Complete misconception. His impact in the 4th innings is not lacking at all. It's the other Indian batsmen who fail in the 4th innings.

His 141 in Adelaide in the 4nd innings chase in 2014 is regarded as the best 4th innings century on Australian soil by many ex-Aussie players.

In the last 5 years, Kohli has a 4th innings average of 45.4 which is the 2nd highest of any batsman having played at least 10 innings.


A 4th innings average of 45. Most people don't even have that as their overall avg...

 

[Darkrai]

Too bad his performance wasn't enough to avoid 4-1 humiliation.

 

[Srtfan]

Some poster claimed kane is better than kohli.kane williamson avg in sa 21,in ind 35 ,in eng 30. Overall avg against ind 37, against pak 35 ,against eng 38. He

 

[Srtfan]

He only bash sl ,zim and bang

 

[New Yorker]

Why are Kohli fans trying to push Kohli being accepted as an ATG now on others?

Any neutral observer would say that it's too early to call him that.

Only complete and utter kohli worshippers would say he is already an ATG.

It's fair enough if someone has racked up 23 centuries in just 71 Tests. Wisden calls Graeme Pollock "Perhaps the finest left-hand batsman the game has ever produced - Donald Bradman certainly thought so, classing only Garry Sobers as his equal among those he saw play." But Pollock had just 7 centuries in 23 internationals. For no truly ATG batsman did the debate about whether they were ATG begin only after they had retired.

 

[EliteCynical]

Imran and Ganguly weren't great tacticians but they weren't super dumb & corrupt like Kohli.

Dhawan played all 5 tests. Freaking Dhawan. Damn.

When Pujara can play all 5 tests, why not Dhawan? If pujara has a 132* at Southampton, Dhawan has a hundred at Auckland which almost won India the game. Other than these 2, how different are their records in SENA. Why do people say freaking Dhawan and not freaking pujara, who for a top order bat gets bowled, lbw and run out far too often!

 

[EliteCynical]

Sorry 4 tests* not 5, but point remains the same!

 

[Mamoon]

Over the years, I have read some terrible posts and some terribly biased posters. However, to claim that Williamson is better than Kohli is gobsmackingly ridiculous. Nonetheless, it is not particularly surprising when you consider the source.

 

[Mamoon]

When Pujara can play all 5 tests, why not Dhawan? If pujara has a 132* at Southampton, Dhawan has a hundred at Auckland which almost won India the game. Other than these 2, how different are their records in SENA. Why do people say freaking Dhawan and not freaking pujara, who for a top order bat gets bowled, lbw and run out far too often!

Pujara is nothing more than decent, but the difference between the two is that Pujara often occupies the crease for long periods even if he is not scoring much. He does protect the middle-order more often than not.

On the contrary, when Dhawan is not scoring, he barely lasts for five overs and exposes the middle-order to the new ball.

Dhawan is a brilliant white ball player but he simply cannot hack it in Tests.

 

[Adijazz1706]

Kohli hasn't played for long enough to be anywhere close to being an ATG, let's take another look 5 years later

 

[Ab Fan]

Williamson average against the top 5 teams, i.e., Australia, South Africa, India, England and Pakistan slips down to a highly mediocre 41.

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/en...8;spanval1=span;template=results;type=batting

Now, there are many arguments that can come against this point like he is not playing enough games at peak and his numbers have also hurt due to initial failures back when he was young. They are no doubt valid arguments.

However, clearly this point is enough to prove that Smith and Kohli are both superior to Williamson and that's not even worth a debate.

 

[Ted123]

Complete misconception. His impact in the 4th innings is not lacking at all. It's the other Indian batsmen who fail in the 4th innings.

His 141 in Adelaide in the 4nd innings chase in 2014 is regarded as the best 4th innings century on Australian soil by many ex-Aussie players.

In the last 5 years, Kohli has a 4th innings average of 45.4 which is the 2nd highest of any batsman having played at least 10 innings.


A 4th innings average of 45. Most people don't even have that as their overall avg...

Lol, it is like bringing Amla's 2nd inning average in ODIs and claiming him as a good chaser.

Kohli failed to take his team over the line in Capetown, Centurion, Edgabastan and Southampton. A quality 100 or even a 70 odd would have won his team any of these match.

What has he won by chasing in 4th inning? Clearly, he lacks impact in 4th inning but he has done a fine job in setting the platform and scoring big for his team, and is on course of becoming an ATG.

The great 4th inning performers were Sunil Gavaskar, Younis Khan and Graeme Smith.

 

[Indiafan]

Lol, it is like bringing Amla's 2nd inning average in ODIs and claiming him as a good chaser.

Kohli failed to take his team over the line in Capetown, Centurion, Edgabastan and Southampton. A quality 100 or even a 70 odd would have won his team any of these match.

What has he won by chasing in 4th inning? Clearly, he lacks impact in 4th inning but he has done a fine job in setting the platform and scoring big for his team, and is on course of becoming an ATG.

The great 4th inning performers were Sunil Gavaskar, Younis Khan and Graeme Smith.

I knew these clutching of straws will start. Some of those scores has never ever been chased in thosr grounds in cricket history. Arguments like these dwell into pathetic cheap mentality when one batsmans one thing is picked and chosen wheras his 1000 strength over others is not. Kohli is superior in a 100 things than younis or smith but somehow the latter are better because of that one thing? What a laughably naive argument

 

[Ted123]

I knew these clutching of straws will start. Some of those scores has never ever been chased in thosr grounds in cricket history. Arguments like these dwell into pathetic cheap mentality when one batsmans one thing is picked and chosen wheras his 1000 strength over others is not. <B>Kohli is superior in a 100 things than younis or smith but somehow the latter are better because of that one thing</B>? What a laughably naive argument

You are the one who is clutching straws. Where did you heard the second last line from? I was only pointing that he lacks impact in 4th inning which is why his team didn't win enough away but he is on the course to be ATG. Such insecure fellas!

 

[the_outsider]

Lol, it is like bringing Amla's 2nd inning average in ODIs and claiming him as a good chaser.

Kohli failed to take his team over the line in Capetown, Centurion, Edgabastan and Southampton. A quality 100 or even a 70 odd would have won his team any of these match.

What has he won by chasing in 4th inning? Clearly, he lacks impact in 4th inning but he has done a fine job in setting the platform and scoring big for his team, and is on course of becoming an ATG.

The great 4th inning performers were Sunil Gavaskar, Younis Khan and Graeme Smith.

Well Amla has a 2nd innings average of 41.6 while Kohli's average is 67.2.

So idk why you thought comparing Amla and Kohli would somehow make your point.

I have already shown you what Kohli does in the 4th innings of a test match.

Innings - 22
Runs - 879
Avg - 51.7
100s - 2
50s - 6

The reason India has failed to chase down scores in the 4th innings is not due to a batsman who is averaging 51. It is due to the rest of the batsman who are failing regularly.

I have given you all the facts. Now whether you agree or disagree will depend on your bias and prejudice. I can't do anything about that.

PS: Since you brought up YK his 4th innings numbers are - avg of 46.6, 2 hundreds and 3 fifties.

 

[Bilal7]

So when it's another player icc tournaments don't matter ? Also didn't know NZ was a minnow nation that can't win away from home.

So drawing a test series is a major achivemeant in cricket now ) ) ? And in the UAE of all places? One of the worst places to play cricket in the world . If you don't believe me ask someone who knows more about cricket than us 2 combined.

How can Amla be an ATG when he has never won a WC for his country ? Waqar never won a test series for Pakistan in South Africa or Australia? So is Waqar not an ATG then ? [MENTION=129948]Bilal7[/MENTION]

You always seem to miss the point, Hasan, which is unfortunate. I am discussing test cricket where the World Cup is irrelevant.

Drawing a series in the UAE against Pakistan is a pretty big achievement, despite your claims of it being the worst place to play cricket. England have gotten destroyed there twice, Australia were neutralized and even South Africa at their peak were unable to beat Pakistan in the UAE. The fact that NZ managed to draw a series there, on the back of a match-winning 192 by Kane Williamson is a great achievement.

 

[Bilal7]

You are the one who is clutching straws. Where did you heard the second last line from? I was only pointing that he lacks impact in 4th inning which is why his team didn't win enough away but he is on the course to be ATG. Such insecure fellas!

This is gold. A hardcore Kohli-fan getting bashed by some uber hardcore Kohli-worshippers. You can see the mentality of people here. Anything less than proclaiming that Kohli is 100x better than any other batsman is not good enough for these Kohli-worshippers.

 

[sensible-indian-fan]

When Pujara can play all 5 tests, why not Dhawan? If pujara has a 132* at Southampton, Dhawan has a hundred at Auckland which almost won India the game. Other than these 2, how different are their records in SENA. Why do people say freaking Dhawan and not freaking pujara, who for a top order bat gets bowled, lbw and run out far too often!

You very well know the answer to this question my friend.

Mamoon has answered the question well.

Dhawan vs Pujara

Without even touching stats, let me post what's there on top of my head:

Dhawan played one good innings in NZ. That's it. Apart from that, a couple of pretty 30 run cameos here and there (Except 80 in Brisbane) and has been a consistent failure otherwise.

Pujara on the other hand...

1. Scored 150 to setup a Joberg 2013 which our bowlers failed to capitalize on
2. Scored a 70 odd to support Vijay in 2nd test too but our batsmen collapsed after that.
3. Blunted the ball in the crucial green track Lord's test win which helped us from collapsing. Got special mention from Mike Atherton in the post presentation ceremony.
4. Wasn't great in Aus tour but played important roles in helping us draw 2 tests by blunting the ball.
5. Played a crucial role in Joberg 2018 win.
6. Played a crucial role in Trent Bridge 2018 win.
7. Singlehandedly kept India in the series after we collapsed to Moeen in Souhtampton. Took us from 197-8 to 270 odd with a slender lead of 26. An incredible century with the series on the line.

And apart from this all, he scored 145* on a green track in SL (which was a worse pitch than 99% of SENA pitches) to save our test & series RIGHT after Shastri and Kohli had dropped him for his SR and played freaking Rohit Sharma in his place. Rahane played at number 3 in that series and was an utter flop.

Apart from that, he is India's BIGGEST match winning batsman in Asia.

Scored all the tough runs on tough pitches. No minnow bashing or FTBing or stat boosting (not that they are wrong but he did do the hard yards too). He is a huge reason we are still at number 1.

Taking everything into account, I am sure you will excuse me for calling Dhawan as "freaking Dhawan".

With all being said, Pujara has to perform better outside Asia and India should start getting other batsmen breathing down his neck. Rahane has to be dropped outright and asked to win back his place.

 

[KingKhanWC]

So 35 avg is poor.




Is this guy you or someone else?

Yes 35 is poor which is what I took it down from 40. Kohli didn't finish with an average below 35 but only just above so it's neither here or there. He's a good batsmen but not ATG in my opinion otherwise in 10 tests he would have a much better average. You think all Indians are greats so we will stick to our views.

 

[Hasan123]

You always seem to miss the point, Hasan, which is unfortunate. I am discussing test cricket where the World Cup is irrelevant.

Drawing a series in the UAE against Pakistan is a pretty big achievement, despite your claims of it being the worst place to play cricket. England have gotten destroyed there twice, Australia were neutralized and even South Africa at their peak were unable to beat Pakistan in the UAE. The fact that NZ managed to draw a series there, on the back of a match-winning 192 by Kane Williamson is a great achievement.

But your point is you can't be a great player if you don't win anything . So Amla has never won a trophy in LO cricket but Fakhar has. Does that mean Fakhar is the better LO player because of this ? This your logic so I would like a response from this. It might not be about tests but your point is if you don't win anything, your runs are irrelevant. So Fakhar is better than Amla according to your logic?

I don't agree with you that drawing in the UAE is a great achievement but for a team who is weak against playing spin it's a respectable achievement. However if NZ won the series , I would say that it is a great series for them.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Yes 35 is poor which is what I took it down from 40. Kohli didn't finish with an average below 35 but only just above so it's neither here or there. He's a good batsmen but not ATG in my opinion otherwise in 10 tests he would have a much better average. You think all Indians are greats so we will stick to our views.

So Sobers Viv Lara Ponting are not ATGs? They all avgd below 40 in some country.

 

[KingKhanWC]

So Sobers Viv Lara Ponting are not ATGs? They all avgd below 40 in some country.

In some country? lol

Viv averaged over 60, Lara and Ponting over 40 in England.

35 is very poor in today times esp when the conditions are very good for batting.

 

[the_outsider]

In some country? lol

Viv averaged over 60, Lara and Ponting over 40 in England.

35 is very poor in today times esp when the conditions are very good for batting.

Ponting averaged 26 in India.

Viv averaged 19 in NZ.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Ponting averaged 26 in India.

Viv averaged 19 in NZ.

India is unique as most of the time the pitches are rank turners from day 1. England has all conditions which test the batsmen in every way. Indians are used to playing on rank turners from a young age and those decks offer not much else so it's expected visiting batsmen to have a tough time when the advantage for the home side is so much.

Viv played 3 matches in NZ only. Give him 10 like Kohli and im sure he would have averaged over 40.

 

[the_outsider]

India is unique as most of the time the pitches are rank turners from day 1. England has all conditions which test the batsmen in every way. Indians are used to playing on rank turners from a young age and those decks offer not much else so it's expected visiting batsmen to have a tough time when the advantage for the home side is so much.

Viv played 3 matches in NZ only. Give him 10 like Kohli and im sure he would have averaged over 40.

Should have would have could have.

Bottom line. Ponting averaged 26 and Viv averaged 19.

Now please convince [MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION] and I how they are not worthy of being ATGs.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Should have would have could have.

Bottom line. Ponting averaged 26 and Viv averaged 19.

Now please convince [MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION] and I how they are not worthy of being ATGs.

Cricket is not a game of simple numbers or stats. If you want to make a compelling argument you need to explain why you are using those stats. If you like many believe Kohli is an ATG it's fine, your view. But by replying to me you have failed to convince me, to say the least.

 

[the_outsider]

Cricket is not a game of simple numbers or stats. If you want to make a compelling argument you need to explain why you are using those stats. If you like many believe Kohli is an ATG it's fine, your view. But by replying to me you have failed to convince me, to say the least.

I am not necessarily saying Kohli is an ATG. I am open to the possibility that he has not reached that yet.

But you yourself set the benchmark at 35. I didn't do that. That was your choice. But now that Ponting and Viv's stats have appeared you are giving excuses like "Indian pictches" and "stats are not everything".

You've made a statement. You should stick to it and justify your stance in a fair way. Else, if you think you've made an error in judgement then you should be able to admit that. There is nothing wrong with that either.

 

[KingKhanWC]

I am not necessarily saying Kohli is an ATG. I am open to the possibility that he has not reached that yet.

But you yourself set the benchmark at 35. I didn't do that. That was your choice. But now that Ponting and Viv's stats have appeared you are giving excuses like "Indian pictches" and "stats are not everything".

You've made a statement. You should stick to it and justify your stance in a fair way. Else, if you think you've made an error in judgement then you should be able to admit that. There is nothing wrong with that either.

Yes I did, 35 in England. I was actually having a bit of fun as I started on 40.

 

[the_outsider]

Yes I did, 35 in England. I was actually having a bit of fun as I started on 40.

Why England specifically? Seems highly unfair to any player who is not English.

It has to be 35 across all countries otherwise that criteria doesn't hold any value. It has to be a fair and equal benchmark, after all.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Why England specifically? Seems highly unfair to any player who is not English.

It has to be 35 across all countries otherwise that criteria doesn't hold any value. It has to be a fair and equal benchmark, after all.

Because imo England has a all round batting conditions. There is some spin, some seam, some swing, some pace and some bounce. Over a 3-5 test series in the English summer batsmen will have to cope with all these factors but not in a very huge way as it wont swing, seam or spin drastically all summer. In India it turns from day 1 to the last day of the series. England is not only the home of cricket because the game was invented here or because of Lords but also imo its the perfect place to play cricket, unless it rains.

 

[the_outsider]

Because imo England has a all round batting conditions. There is some spin, some seam, some swing, some pace and some bounce. Over a 3-5 test series in the English summer batsmen will have to cope with all these factors but not in a very huge way as it wont swing, seam or spin drastically all summer. In India it turns from day 1 to the last day of the series. England is not only the home of cricket because the game was invented here or because of Lords but also imo its the perfect place to play cricket, unless it rains.

The ball really doesn't turn much on English pitches, especially when there is no rough.

And in the SC the ball reverses much more than it ever has in England. That is because of the lush outfields in England compared to India, SL, etc. Also the humidity and heat in the SC is another challenge batsmen don't have to face in England.

There is no one country that is the best place to judge a batsman. Every country has its own challenges. India has spin. Australia has bounce. SA has seam and Eng has swing. They are all things that challenge batsmen.

It has to be a universal benchmark. Else it is meaningless.

 

[KingKhanWC]

The ball really doesn't turn much on English pitches, especially when there is no rough.

And in the SC the ball reverses much more than it ever has in England. That is because of the lush outfields in England compared to India, SL, etc. Also the humidity and heat in the SC is another challenge batsmen don't have to face in England.

There is no one country that is the best place to judge a batsman. Every country has its own challenges. India has spin. Australia has bounce. SA has seam and Eng has swing. They are all things that challenge batsmen.

It has to be a universal benchmark. Else it is meaningless.

As I said there is enough of each facet to make the test match game interesting and the best to play. In the summer of England you will get everything over the course of a series, in India only spin is guaranteed. Every country has it's own challenges but England has them all but not overly. I know how reverse swing works thanks. Im going round in circles, you're entitled to your views. Thanks.

 

[Bilal7]

So when it's another player icc tournaments don't matter ? Also didn't know NZ was a minnow nation that can't win away from home.

So drawing a test series is a major achivemeant in cricket now ) ) ? And in the UAE of all places? One of the worst places to play cricket in the world . If you don't believe me ask someone who knows more about cricket than us 2 combined.

How can Amla be an ATG when he has never won a WC for his country ? Waqar never won a test series for Pakistan in South Africa or Australia? So is Waqar not an ATG then ? [MENTION=129948]Bilal7[/MENTION]

But your point is you can't be a great player if you don't win anything . So Amla has never won a trophy in LO cricket but Fakhar has. Does that mean Fakhar is the better LO player because of this ? This your logic so I would like a response from this. It might not be about tests but your point is if you don't win anything, your runs are irrelevant. So Fakhar is better than Amla according to your logic?

I don't agree with you that drawing in the UAE is a great achievement but for a team who is weak against playing spin it's a respectable achievement. However if NZ won the series , I would say that it is a great series for them.

Stop putting words in my mouth. Now read carefully: For Kohli to go down as a great test player, he needs to win India more games and or series away from his comfort-zone and/or against the best teams in the world. So in Australia, England, South Africa, New Zealand and Pakistan/UAE. This is what all the greats have done. Kohli has won India one match in England thus far, which is good but not good enough for him to be referred to as a great test player.

As far as ODIs go, Kohli is already a great ODI player and he does not need to help his team win a WC to do so. Similarly, Amla and Waqar and all the rest are also great ODI players despite not having helped their team win a WC. Different format, different rules for obvious reasons. However if Kohli does boss the 2019 ODI WC and helps India win the trophy, his stock will obviously rise.

 

[Junaids]

Virat Kohli in SENA

Australia, 2011/12: 300 runs at 37.5
3rd highest scorer of the series

South Africa, 2013: 272 runs at 68;
2nd highest scorer of the series

New Zealand, 2014: 214 runs at 71.33
3rd highest scorer of the series

England, 2014: 134 runs at 13.4

Australia, 2014/15: 692 runs at 86.5
2nd highest scorer in the series

South Africa, 2018: 268 runs at 47.7
Highest run scorer of the series

England, 2018: 593 runs at 59.3
Highest run scorer of the series

This thread is absolutely insane.

Virat Kohli is a really good batsman in all 3 forms of the game.

But in order to be an all-time great, you need to be indisputably one of the top ten players of your type in history.

If we restrict ourselves to Test cricket, Virat Kohli has not demonstrated that he is superior to Steve Smith, Kane Williamson, Joe Root and especially AB De Villiers.

In other words, he is one of 5 players in his generation in his role who are all of much the same level. And he is not a demonstrably superior Test batsman to any of them.

If you look at 1928-1948, Don Bradman was clearly better than any other batsman.

If you look at 1968-1978, Barry Richards was clearly better than any other batsman - including Viv Richards.

If you look at 1978-1988, Viv Richards was clearly the best batsman.

In contrast, from 1992-2005 it was impossible to separate Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara, Ricky Ponting, Jacques Kallis and then towards the end Kumar Sangakkara.

But now, in one of the weakest eras in Test history, Virat Kohli is on a level with 4 other batsmen.

I'm sorry, but while he is a superb batsman, he has a lot of work to do to reach ATG status.

 

[Dr_Bassim]

Yes 35 is poor which is what I took it down from 40. Kohli didn't finish with an average below 35 but only just above so it's neither here or there. He's a good batsmen but not ATG in my opinion otherwise in 10 tests he would have a much better average. You think all Indians are greats so we will stick to our views.

Don't you think his 35 average might be linked to how awful he was the first time he toured England and how much better he was, when he toured the 2nd time now?

He averages nearly 60 this time.

He averaged probably less than 10 the first time if I am correct.

Of course he is going to average less than 40 or something in England overall.

When such an anomaly occurs, you have to look at the general direction the career is going.

Is Virat going up or down in England.

His learning curve seems to be going up and he seems to have improved drastically in English conditions from averaging nothing to averaging the highest batsmen on both sides.

You might agree to the loose association, that it's too early to call him ATG (and that's fine by me) but if you are going to just consider a bottom line average then he averages 36 because of one bad tour and he will definitely erase that in next tour.

Common sense suggests so.

 

[Rahul1]

This thread is absolutely insane.

Virat Kohli is a really good batsman in all 3 forms of the game.

But in order to be an all-time great, you need to be indisputably one of the top ten players of your type in history.

If we restrict ourselves to Test cricket, Virat Kohli has not demonstrated that he is superior to Steve Smith, Kane Williamson, Joe Root and especially AB De Villiers.

In other words, he is one of 5 players in his generation in his role who are all of much the same level. And he is not a demonstrably superior Test batsman to any of them.

If you look at 1928-1948, Don Bradman was clearly better than any other batsman.

If you look at 1968-1978, Barry Richards was clearly better than any other batsman - including Viv Richards.

If you look at 1978-1988, Viv Richards was clearly the best batsman.

In contrast, from 1992-2005 it was impossible to separate Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara, Ricky Ponting, Jacques Kallis and then towards the end Kumar Sangakkara.

But now, in one of the weakest eras in Test history, Virat Kohli is on a level with 4 other batsmen.

I'm sorry, but while he is a superb batsman, he has a lot of work to do to reach ATG status.

LMAO. Kohli is much better than Root and Williamson.

 

[Ab Fan]

Because imo England has a all round batting conditions. There is some spin, some seam, some swing, some pace and some bounce. Over a 3-5 test series in the English summer batsmen will have to cope with all these factors but not in a very huge way as it wont swing, seam or spin drastically all summer. In India it turns from day 1 to the last day of the series. England is not only the home of cricket because the game was invented here or because of Lords but also imo its the perfect place to play cricket, unless it rains.

Well, if we look at all-round conditions, then it is South Africa which has all-round conditions. Bounce is not common in all venues of England but it is in South Africa and you need to be up against variable bounce and there will always be initial swing up for fast bowlers, which is what makes SA conditions the toughest to bat.

Heck, if we look at all the great Asian batsmen and their performance in SA, then pretty much all of them have fared poorly there except Sachin who himself averages 50+ in England and 40+ in SA. The pace attack of SA is also better than the one that England has because they had Steyn in past and now Rabada.

The major Asian batter, i.e. Dravid, Sangakkara, Inzy, Moyo, YK, Miandad have all done well in England but failed in SA.

 

[Ab Fan]

This thread is absolutely insane.

Virat Kohli is a really good batsman in all 3 forms of the game.

But in order to be an all-time great, you need to be indisputably one of the top ten players of your type in history.

If we restrict ourselves to Test cricket, Virat Kohli has not demonstrated that he is superior to Steve Smith, Kane Williamson, Joe Root and especially AB De Villiers.

In other words, he is one of 5 players in his generation in his role who are all of much the same level. And he is not a demonstrably superior Test batsman to any of them.

If you look at 1928-1948, Don Bradman was clearly better than any other batsman.

If you look at 1968-1978, Barry Richards was clearly better than any other batsman - including Viv Richards.

If you look at 1978-1988, Viv Richards was clearly the best batsman.

In contrast, from 1992-2005 it was impossible to separate Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara, Ricky Ponting, Jacques Kallis and then towards the end Kumar Sangakkara.

But now, in one of the weakest eras in Test history, Virat Kohli is on a level with 4 other batsmen.

I'm sorry, but while he is a superb batsman, he has a lot of work to do to reach ATG status.

Kohli outperformed Root in Indian conditions in 2016 and again outperformed him in England conditions in 2018. What else he should do to demonstrate you that he hasn't outperformed Root?

Kindly do give a response to it.

 

[cricketjoshila]

In some country? lol

Viv averaged over 60, Lara and Ponting over 40 in England.

35 is very poor in today times esp when the conditions are very good for batting.

Sobers and Viv avgd less than 35 in NZ
Ponting avgd in 20s in India
Lara avgd around 33 in India

So they are not ATGs.

 

[the_outsider]

This thread is absolutely insane.

Virat Kohli is a really good batsman in all 3 forms of the game.

But in order to be an all-time great, you need to be indisputably one of the top ten players of your type in history.

If we restrict ourselves to Test cricket, Virat Kohli has not demonstrated that he is superior to Steve Smith, Kane Williamson, Joe Root and especially AB De Villiers.

In other words, he is one of 5 players in his generation in his role who are all of much the same level. And he is not a demonstrably superior Test batsman to any of them.

If you look at 1928-1948, Don Bradman was clearly better than any other batsman.

If you look at 1968-1978, Barry Richards was clearly better than any other batsman - including Viv Richards.

If you look at 1978-1988, Viv Richards was clearly the best batsman.

In contrast, from 1992-2005 it was impossible to separate Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara, Ricky Ponting, Jacques Kallis and then towards the end Kumar Sangakkara.

But now, in one of the weakest eras in Test history, Virat Kohli is on a level with 4 other batsmen.

I'm sorry, but while he is a superb batsman, he has a lot of work to do to reach ATG status.

Nonsense.

In tests Kohli and Smith are in a separate league to everyone else. Even the English don't rate Root in the same league as Kohli. Heard it from all those guys - Hussain, Botham, Swann, Atherton, etc. And I rate Williamson higher than Root but even he falls well short of Kohli.

And in LOIs Kohli is head and shoulders above everyone else. Nobody comes even close.

And if you don't believe me, look at the highest rating points achieved by all these players across formats. You will get your answer.

He may or may not be ATG in your eyes. But is miles better than his peers and then some.

 

[Junaids]

Nonsense.

In tests Kohli and Smith are in a separate league to everyone else. Even the English don't rate Root in the same league as Kohli. Heard it from all those guys - Hussain, Botham, Swann, Atherton, etc. And I rate Williamson higher than Root but even he falls well short of Kohli.

And in LOIs Kohli is head and shoulders above everyone else. Nobody comes even close.

And if you don't believe me, look at the highest rating points achieved by all these players across formats. You will get your answer.

He may or may not be ATG in your eyes. But is miles better than his peers and then some.

You might be right.

I limited my reply to Tests - and I see little difference between that group, and I think AB De Villiers was better than Kohli and Smith.

 

[the_outsider]

You might be right.

I limited my reply to Tests - and I see little difference between that group, and I think AB De Villiers was better than Kohli and Smith.

I don't put Smith in the same league as ABD and Kohli. There's a difference of 16 runs between Smith and ABD/Kohli's ODI average.

And I personally do believe ABD is an ATG. And Kohli has outperformed ABD in terms of almost every stat be is average or number of centuries, etc. Which is why I think Kohli is very close to being an overall ATG and that in LOIs he is already an ATG.

 

[Hasan123]

Stop putting words in my mouth. Now read carefully: For Kohli to go down as a great test player, he needs to win India more games and or series away from his comfort-zone and/or against the best teams in the world. So in Australia, England, South Africa, New Zealand and Pakistan/UAE. This is what all the greats have done. Kohli has won India one match in England thus far, which is good but not good enough for him to be referred to as a great test player.

As far as ODIs go, Kohli is already a great ODI player and he does not need to help his team win a WC to do so. Similarly, Amla and Waqar and all the rest are also great ODI players despite not having helped their team win a WC. Different format, different rules for obvious reasons. However if Kohli does boss the 2019 ODI WC and helps India win the trophy, his stock will obviously rise.

No it's different rules for you to protect your favourties.

 

[giri26]

Virat Kohli gets to his 24th Test hundred against West Indies. This is most by any current active player in Tests beating Steven Smith's 23 Test hundreds.

 

[Hitman]

This man will easily go down as the second greatest batsman from Asia, if not the greatest.

 

[AMSS]

Steve Smith would hopefully put up with staying forever in Virat's rear view mirror.

 

[leatherface58]

This guy is unreal. He was averaging 14 after the 2014 series in England. He took it up to 36 in the next series. One more series and he might take it up to 50 or so. He is not as consistent as Smith in tests but he really makes his peaks count.

 

[Hitman]

Smith - 23 centuries in 117 innings.

Kohli - 24 centuries in 124 innings.

 

[BlackShadow]

Virat Kohli is nearing GOAT status, so of course he has secured his position as an ATG,

 

[Abdullah719]

Virat Kohli Scores Over 1000 Test Runs For 3rd Straight Year, Only Indian To Achieve This Feat

India captain Virat Kohli on Friday achieved a significant milestone on the Day 2 of the first Test match against the Windies at the Saurashtra Cricket Association Stadium (SCA) in Rajkot. Virat Kohli became the only Indian cricketer to score more than 1000 runs in Test cricket for the third consecutive year. The 29-year-old Kohli (139), who also notched up his 24th Test ton in the match, took nine matches and 17 innings to cross the 1000-run mark in 2018. He has scored with an impressive average of a little over 59 in this calendar year with the highest score of 153.

Virat Kohli is also the only batsman so far to score over 1000 runs in this calendar year. England Test captain Joe Root is second in the list with 719 runs from 10 matches while South African Aiden Markram is third with 660 runs from nine matches.

Kohli also became the second quickest batsman to reach 24 Test centuries after Australian great Donald Bradman.

The Indian skipper also surpassed Australia's Steve Smith to top the list of centurions among active players. Smith, who is serving a one-year ball tampering ban, has 23 tons in 64 Tests.

Kohli reached his 24th century in his 123rd innings, while Australia's Bradman took just 66 knocks to achieve the same feat.

https://sports.ndtv.com/india-vs-we...-for-3-years-the-only-indian-to-achie-1927381

 

[Tusker]

This man will easily go down as the second greatest batsman from Asia, if not the greatest.

In the world... not just Asia

 

[Hitman]

In the world... not just Asia

That would be even more sweet.

 

[jeetu]

Virat Kohli has joined one of the select few batsman to score 4 centuries a year in 3 or more years in a row.

[table=width: 500, class: grid, align: center]
[tr][td]Player [/td][td]Mat [/td][td]100 [/td][td]Year [/td][td]Count [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]AN Cook (ENG) [/td][td]14 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]2010 [/td][td]3 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]AN Cook (ENG) [/td][td]8 [/td][td]4 [/td][td]2011 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]AN Cook (ENG) [/td][td]15 [/td][td]4 [/td][td]2012 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]KP Pietersen (ENG) [/td][td]14 [/td][td]4 [/td][td]2006 [/td][td]3 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]KP Pietersen (ENG) [/td][td]11 [/td][td]4 [/td][td]2007 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]KP Pietersen (ENG) [/td][td]12 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]2008 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]ML Hayden (AUS) [/td][td]14 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]2001 [/td][td]3 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]ML Hayden (AUS) [/td][td]11 [/td][td]6 [/td][td]2002 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]ML Hayden (AUS) [/td][td]12 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]2003 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SM Gavaskar (INDIA) [/td][td]11 [/td][td]4 [/td][td]1976 [/td][td]4 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SM Gavaskar (INDIA) [/td][td]7 [/td][td]4 [/td][td]1977 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SM Gavaskar (INDIA) [/td][td]8 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]1978 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SM Gavaskar (INDIA) [/td][td]17 [/td][td]4 [/td][td]1979 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SPD Smith (AUS) [/td][td]9 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]2014 [/td][td]4 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SPD Smith (AUS) [/td][td]13 [/td][td]6 [/td][td]2015 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SPD Smith (AUS) [/td][td]11 [/td][td]4 [/td][td]2016 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SPD Smith (AUS) [/td][td]11 [/td][td]6 [/td][td]2017 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]V Kohli (INDIA) [/td][td]12 [/td][td]4 [/td][td]2016 [/td][td]3 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]V Kohli (INDIA) [/td][td]10 [/td][td]5 [/td][td]2017 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]V Kohli (INDIA) [/td][td]9 [/td][td]4 [/td][td]2018 [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[/table]

Hayden is the only one with 5 centuries in 3 consecutive years.

 

[jeetu]

[table=width: 500, class: grid, align: center]
[tr][td]Player [/td][td]Number of times atleast 4 Centuries in a year [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]RT Ponting (AUS) [/td][td]6 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SM Gavaskar (INDIA) [/td][td]6 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td] [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]JH Kallis (SA) [/td][td]5 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]KC Sangakkara (SL) [/td][td]5 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SR Tendulkar (INDIA) [/td][td]5 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td] [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]AJ Strauss (ENG) [/td][td]4 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]AN Cook (ENG) [/td][td]4 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]GC Smith (SA) [/td][td]4 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]ML Hayden (AUS) [/td][td]4 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]V Kohli (INDIA) [/td][td]4 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SPD Smith (AUS) [/td][td]4 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td] [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]BC Lara (WI) [/td][td]3 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]DA Warner (AUS) [/td][td]3 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]DB Vengsarkar (INDIA) [/td][td]3 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]DG Bradman (AUS) [/td][td]3 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]KP Pietersen (ENG) [/td][td]3 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]MJ Clarke (AUS) [/td][td]3 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]R Dravid (INDIA) [/td][td]3 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]SR Waugh (AUS) [/td][td]3 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td] [/td][td] [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]AB de Villiers (SA) [/td][td]2 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]AJ Lamb (ENG) [/td][td]2 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]AR Border (AUS) [/td][td]2 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]CH Gayle (WI) [/td][td]2 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]DC Boon (AUS) [/td][td]2 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]DPMD Jayawardene (SL) [/td][td]2 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]GS Sobers (WI) [/td][td]2 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]HM Amla (SA) [/td][td]2 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Inzamam-ul-Haq (PAK) [/td][td]2 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]JL Langer (AUS) [/td][td]2 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]KS Williamson (NZ) [/td][td]2 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]MA Taylor (AUS) [/td][td]2 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]ME Trescothick (ENG) [/td][td]2 [/td][/tr]
[tr][td]Mohammad Yousuf (PAK) [/td][td]2 [/td][/tr]
[/table]

 

[Bhaijaan]

Smith 21 test hundreds in 4 years is an insane feat.

He is the greatest test batsman of this generation. Virat is still Bobby to him.

 

[docteurmanish]

Kohli overtakes Smith now . runs in crunch situations- more than smith
dont forget his odi greatness -

 

[jeetu]

Smith 21 test hundreds in 4 years is an insane feat.

He is the greatest test batsman of this generation. Virat is still Bobby to him.

Smith is on another level but Kohli is steadily rising to his level. Smith has been maintaining his peak from 2015 while has been there just few months back.

 

[axis]

No way, Virat can be called an ATG, he just plundered weak attacks on flat tracks.

 

[austerlitz]

No way, Virat can be called an ATG, he just plundered weak attacks on flat tracks.

5 centuries vs aus in aus at average 62
1 against Nz in Nz at 77 avg.
2 centuries and a 96 against SA in SA at 56 avg.
2 centuries and a 97 against england in england at 37.

 

[axis]

5 centuries vs aus in aus at average 62
1 against Nz in Nz at 77 avg.
2 centuries and a 96 against SA in SA at 56 avg.
2 centuries and a 97 against england in england at 37.

Why no centuries against Aus and SA in Indian turning tracks ?

 

[Buffet]

Why no centuries against Aus and SA in Indian turning tracks ?

Because Aus and SA had ATG spinners and Kohli failed when stakes were highest.

 

[axis]

Because Aus and SA had ATG spinners and Kohli failed when stakes were highest.

Kohli failed in both series when stakes were high.. and yes Aus fielded a good spin attack.

 

[the_outsider]

Because Aus and SA had ATG spinners and Kohli failed when stakes were highest.

Yes because tours of SA (2013), NZ (2014), Aus (2014), Eng (2016), SA (2018) and Eng (2018) were all friendly matches. All 17 test matches were just played for fun.

Even in the SA home series of 2015 that you mention, Kohli did well. It was a very low-scoring series. Apart from Rahane, no batsmen from either side averaged more than 36. Kohli averaged 33.

 

[Buffet]

Yes because tours of SA (2013), NZ (2014), Aus (2014), Eng (2016), SA (2018) and Eng (2018) were all friendly matches. All 17 test matches were just played for fun.

Even in the SA home series of 2015 that you mention, Kohli did well. It was a very low-scoring series. Apart from Rahane, no batsmen from either side averaged more than 36. Kohli averaged 33.

Turn your sarcasm meter on

 

[the_outsider]

Turn your sarcasm meter on

In my defence, it was hard to detect.

 

[Swashbuckler]

Greatest batsman I've watched live since I started following cricket, I missed Sachin and Lara's peak years. In tests Smith may be a contender but Virat is the complete package.